Geoff-Topia

We're All a Bunch of Fruit-Cakes: The New Atheism's Real Agenda

2008-02-05T18:21:00.000-05:00

Many Christians have had much to say, lately, about the rise of the new atheism (you know Michael Hitchens, Richard Dawkins, and all those guys). But, it seems to me they have all missed something. They have all been offering the explination that the new atheism is just another way to subvert the athority of God over their lives, but that has been the agenda of atheism since the first atheist.

With new atheism comes new agendas. It's actually kind of cute, and I think we all should have a good ironic chortell over it. Considering how they have been calling us idiots and retards for what we believe. I really believe they perceive us unsophisticated, unscientific, and unstably minded Christians as the ones standing in the way of some great utopia that science is inevitably going to lead us to.

Why didn't I Ask for Money and Hot Chicks?

2007-10-18T12:53:00.000-04:00

Well I got my birthday wish; I am now officially a world ranked minesweeper. Go here and see that I'm the 477'th best minesweeper in the world.

Happy Birthday to Me

2007-10-04T12:01:00.000-04:00

Yep, today is the big three-zero. I not sure how I feel about it yet. I geuss I should quit smoking as they say that any damge caused can be reversed if stop at thirty. They also say that thirty is the new twenty. I hope that's true because I hardly feel like I'm an even an adult. On the bright side I have lost fifteen pounds in the last month or so. I'm amazed how easily i've done it just by eating healthier. More whole grains and fiber less saturated fat and smaller portions. Mmmmm falafel. I made my first attemp at falafel from scratch, it was no Mamoun's but it came closer than I thought it would. I'm going to go play minesweeper, I'm only one second away from qualifying for a world ranking, that would be a nice birthday present...

I Love To Say, "I Told You, So!"

2007-09-07T22:43:00.000-04:00

Anyone see 20/20 tonight, about TCAP?

On a related note check this shizzle out.

Empircal Hipocrisy

2007-09-03T18:22:00.000-04:00

I just recently discovered what, I think, is a great irony in the whole global climate change debate: You got all these freaking naturalistic scientist saying that global warming was sent into hyper-drive because of the industrial revolution.

Yeah, that's right! The same industrial revolution that was fueled by eighteenth century empirical ideologies.

Another victory for pragmatism!

I don't get you, Neil.

2007-07-10T13:48:00.000-04:00

My friend Todd and I went to see Rush last night at the Mohegan Sun Casino Arena. And, even though the sound in there is just slightly better than an airplane hanger or maybe a wind tunnel, and they were way too loud, they were really on.

During the song Secret Touch, from their 2002 album Vapor Trails, I started thinking about all the things Neil Peart had gone through before penning those lyrics and all the stuff my family has gone through with the suicide of my brother, and I just started to well-up, and thought to myself, "Neil, how on earth can you write these lyrics and not believe in a personal benevolent God?" they go as follows:

The way out
Is the way in
The way out
Is the way in...

Out of touch
With the weather and the wind direction
With the sunrise
And the phases of the moon
Out of touch
With life in the land of the loving
With the living night
And the darkness at high noon

You can never break the chain
There is never love without pain
A gentle hand, a secret touch on the heart

Out of sync
With the rhythm of my own reactions
With the things that last
And the things that come apart
Out of sync
With love in the land of the living
A gentle hand, a secret touch on the heart

A healing hand, a secret touch on the heart

There is never love without pain
Life is a power that remains

Geoff Bosco Tackles the Problem of Evil and Suffering

2007-06-24T18:38:00.000-04:00

WARNING THIS POST CONTAINS GRAPHIC PROFANITY:

I'll be the first to admit that I get in over my head sometimes, not having a formal philosophical education, but I do believe I have a unique perspective on matters such as these.

I don't know what is is about me (call it a certain kind of masochism, or maybe a martyr's heart,I don't know) but, I feel compelled to expose myself to atheistic philosophy and philosophers, even if it leaves me feeling bad afterwards.

Anyway, the problem of evil goes something like this: If God, in all His glory, really exists why does He allow so much suffering?

I just finished listening to the Philosophy Bites podcast with Steven Law, he gives the classical atheist responses to what he called theodicies...you know like freewill, Intelligent design, and all that happy horse crap but, I have no interest in inventing a better theodicy. I'll leave that to Kirk Cameron. I just have a few observations for the Steven Laws of the world.

What, the fuck, does Steven Law know about any one's suffering? Have you ever noticed how angry these people get when they talk about suffering? I did and it got me to thinking that they are not talking about something as abstract, to them at least, as some child suffering in an earthquake. They are obfuscating the fact that they are simply pissing and moaning about their own pain and suffering. If they are right about naturalistic evolution then why is it bad that some weak little people in some far off country they've never been to, dies because they have no food? Isn't it just natures way of weeding out the people not smart enough to get food by any means necessary? Or not smart enough to leave before an earthquake like the animals that do? Survival of the fittest, isn't that how it works? If they say that this naturalistic view proves their point then why be so angry about it?

This is kind of part two of my open question to atheists. The reason for the question, was because I got into a debate on Youtube with a satanist about the existence of God and he said something like satanist don't believe in satan or the supernatural, satan is simply a symbol of their own self worship. The problem with the Steven Laws of the world is that they lack the intellectual honesty of the satanist. The reason they don't believe in God is because they worship themselves and the real God is nothing like them, which, to me is, the greatest reason I could ever give myself to believe in God, CAN I GET AN AMEN!

Ahh, I feel much better now.

Separated at Birth? You Decide.

2007-06-18T00:26:00.001-04:00

So I bought Pan's Labyrinth on DVD, and I'm watching the interview with director Guillermo Del Toro on disc 2 from Charlie Rose and I'm all, "dude...this guy looks familiar." And, then a few minutes goes by and I realize why.

An Open Question to Atheists

2007-06-07T16:34:00.000-04:00

If God did exist, what would you want Him/Her/It to be like?

While I'm At It

2007-06-03T22:43:00.000-04:00

How low have we sunk as a culture when we have to watch "To Catch a Predator" to feel OK about our own goodness?

Disclaimer: I know what I'm about write, many of you will strongly react to, but please read it carefully and think about the arguments I'm making.

Another thing that bugs me is that the people at Dateline are the same people that defend "reproductive rights" for thirteen year-old-girls. The fact is dirty old men go on the Internet to find teenage girls because it works; They wouldn't do it otherwise. In my very Unhumble opinion if you tell a teenage girl it is OK to have sex with teenage boys...well what do you expect?

Thanks Dateline for contributing to a problem and then pretending to fix it. As if putting five guys in jail a month is really keeping our kids safe.

Judd Apatow Is The Master

2007-06-03T21:46:00.000-04:00

Just got home from seeing "Knocked Up", and all I have to say is: if this movie is going to give big and dumpy, but smart and funny underachievers like myself a shot with hot women, bring on the ladies, there is enough Geoff to go around.

Another Stupid Observation

2007-04-07T00:34:00.000-04:00

Have you ever called a friends cell phone and gotten the voice mail message starting with: "Hi this is philosphically ignorant. I'm not here right now please leave ..."

Yeah I've heard that one many times and thought, "you're not where? It's a cell phone, are you in the next room. Is you're phone nine feet away on the love seat and you're on the sofa...maybe the lazyboy?"

This brings up another philosphical quandry: where is here anyway. I know it is physically impossible for you and cell phone to share the same space at the same time, didn't we all learn that in science class? The existential imlications are mind melting.

Things I've Learned Since My Last Post

2007-03-22T20:06:00.000-04:00

The age of enlightenment is highly overrated, the golden mean is wrong, and insurance is an evil concept straight from the pit of hell. I'm too lazy to deffend these arguments right now, except to say that you can't use you reason until you start with a belief. Truth is Gods way and does not exists between two human extremes, it exists on a compltely different plain. The end result of insurance will be that no one will be able to wipe there ass unless the insurance company say so. You want to find a real obstacle to freedom look at how much of our lives are controled in order that insurance companies don't lose money. We give them our money and then they tell exactly what we can and can't do otherwise they don't pay when something does go wrong.

Sorry It Took So Long...

2006-01-14T21:14:00.000-05:00

To save time I'm just gonna post the rest of the tracks that I have done. I have more in the works but here are the final three.

This is song was written by Mike Brandon the young man who is singing. He also was the one who played many of the leads on Gone. This one is called Spy Girl

This is a version of an old Sam Cook tune called Summertime

Now this is something special, this tune has been appearing in a certain car commercial lately but this version bears little stylistic similarities to the original...oh yeah it last almost twenty minutes, but don't let that scare you-none of it is boring. The reason for that is Jesse Brown. His improvised chord substitutions and just plain jazz genius make this one of those things you just can't repeat...oh yeah this is the only track so far that I don't play on. So here it is Use Me

Bad Love

2005-11-28T22:32:00.000-05:00

I'm calling this Zappaesque jam Bad Love...and that's all I have to say about that.

Best of Mario's Part Two

2005-11-20T22:44:00.000-05:00

Hey thanks everyone for the nice comments about Whipping Post.

The next track in this series is called Gone. The players are: again Casey Gorman on guitar and vocals, Mike Brandon on guitar, John Springer on bass, and most importantly me on drums.

background and things to listen for:

This is a Gmin blues and the lyrics were improvised by Casey around a general idea he had. It was the first song we did the night of 10-25-05.

Mike Brandon does most of the leads in this song, he is the louder of the two guitars, which isn't unusual for him.

The bassist added an effects unit to his wonderful Ash Down rig, and during the song at around 2:45 seconds you can hear him fumbling around trying to get more low end in his sound. This also is the reason for the playful but fierce exchange at the end of the track. Apparently one of the bass eq knobs was turned way down on his new unit which he wasn't 100% familiar with.

I consider this one of my best recorded drum performances. Listen to the interlude after the second guitar solo at around 7:55.

The Goods

2005-10-28T18:48:00.000-04:00

As promised, My friend Todd put the first in hopefully a long series of "The Best of Mario's Open Mic Night."

This is me on drums Todd on bass and Casey Gorman on guitar playing and singing the perennial bar classic Whipping Post. Casey is the host of the open mic, his band is Hubinger St. a very popular band local to New Haven, CT. We kind of pulled this one out of our butts but the jamming on it is worthy of repeated listenings.

So without further adieu: Whipping Post

I'm Not Quite Dead

2005-10-25T01:59:00.000-04:00

Hey everyone...I'm still here. I haven't posted in a while but I thought I'd let you know some stuff that's been going down.

Work has been keeping me pretty run down (which is why I haven't posted in a while) but I've been working with my bassist friend Todd (the same one from Musical Object lesson 2) on getting some songs together (we're putting the finishing touches on "Lunch with Gina" from Steely Dan's last album, and it's soundin' pretty good...we might play it open mic night at Mario's cafe tonight) and maybe put a band together if I can find a drummer.

Drummer huh? I wish I had two of me...I would love to have one of my clones on drums while I sang and played guitar.

Oh yeah speaking of open mic night at Mario's...I brought a few condenser mics my mackie and a tape recorder down a few weeks ago and with the aid of some computer magic managed to get some quality recordings of the kinda of fun we have down there. Hopefully I'll have something on the web pretty soon.

Stay tuned for: A Tale of two Bassists, and the Quest for the Warm Fuzzies

Sick of it All

2005-09-30T22:46:00.000-04:00

I'm sick of everything...sick of our stupid me culture...everyone complains about how they don't make enough money, and yet if they were in charge they would do things exactly the same way because we all love money just as much as the people who already have it...they'd pay their employees as little as possible and just keep gettin' as much as you can as long as you can 'cause we got to have our stuff, no one's taking our stuff away...and the thing of it is I only care about myself and I'm sick of that too...I'm sick of the absence of community...human beings aren't meant to live in separate houses all by ourselves so nobody can judge them...has that become the American dream? I'm sick of having to be the same as every one else...everyone needs a car to go to work, to pay for a roof over their head, and hopefully to have a house to go to where hopefully no one will give them any guff...well guess what? I don't care about that stuff...I'm an entertainer, I want to sing songs and make people laugh...that's it! A real community has a place for every different kind of person...not our culture though...I have to go to work at a crappy job for some faceless corporation that cares more about the customer's money than the customer...why aren't you up-selling you pee-on! Maybe it's because I hate, as a customer, being up-sold to...the only reason you can get away with it is because every store does it and most people don't realize how much they hate it...big giant faceless corporations don't judge you, they only want your money...they don't care how you are doing...so go ahead and steal some straws...take a few extra packets of sugar...all the stuff that they don't keep behind the counter is free to you...In place of doing things the right way they'll just raise the prices a bit...but you wont care as long as they don't judge you! I bet the ancient Romans thought life would always be that good...but it took over a thousand years for man to reinvent concrete and running water...go to Papua New Guinea and see how much cargo they have...But they have community they make the right kind of judgments about each other...we try to avoid being judged in the proper way and end up condemning everyone else with the wrong kind of judgments, and I'm sick of it!

Toilet Humor

2005-09-28T18:51:00.000-04:00

Say no to germs? Does that mean I can say yes to drugs now?

A Great Mind Wasted No More

2005-09-19T19:50:00.000-04:00

Hey everybody who reads my blog...all twelve of you. Check out my Cafe Press store Geoff-Topia. I have one bumper sticker there so far and more on the way.

Is It Getting Cold In Here?

2005-09-13T11:18:00.000-04:00

There has got to be a way to turn junk mail (snail mail, not spam) into heating fuel. I'll get my people on it right away.

Just Hit Triple Digits

2005-09-09T17:11:00.000-04:00

Geoff-topia just hit a milestone. I don't know how many people actually care about this kind of thing yet, but I hope to set a precedent:

My profile views have hit triple digits. As it stands now as I write this it's at 111. Woo Hoo! Keep it coming people! I couldn't have done it without you.

Is this post self-indulgent? Probably, but you all love me anyway!

Please love me!

Kanye West Can Do No Wrong

2005-09-06T16:48:00.000-04:00

Even though what Kanye west said was stupid, I can't help but like him. I heard a replay of his comments and it just sounded like someone who was so emotional that he wasn't in complete control. I find his out-bursts kind of winsome and childlike. For some reason no matter what he says I'm not offended. Maybe it's just because he can write the kind of words he wrote in Jesus Walks that I think that. Am I alone?

Yeah...But Do They Eat Pudding?

2005-09-06T16:25:00.000-04:00

Once again South Park goes from the profane to the prophetic. Ang Lee is directing a new movie titled Brokeback Mountain about two gay cowboys played by Heath Ledger and Jake Gyllenhaal. And that's all I have to say about that.

I Hate the Radio

2005-08-29T21:00:00.000-04:00

On one side you got AOR and Top Forty pumping out the same songs it's been playing for the last thirty years. On the other side you got freaky hippie leftists playing obscure crap because if it is obscure it's got to be good, right?

Can't I just have people who know what is good music play the music they like. There is some of this on both sides, but it all goes back to what I was writing about before with the recognizing the artist and not the art. There are people who just have good taste. I know this sounds obvious, but if it is so obvious, why is there so much bad and or overplayed music being played?

I think there is fallacious idea going around, in the name of diversity, that the more people that do something the better off we are. In other words: it would always be a bad thing if a few people with truly good taste had most of the say in what music is heard by the public.

Now, you might say that I'm doing a good job at describing what Clear Channel is trying to do. But the fact that I hate Clear Channel should be clear to any reasonably intelligent person.

"The problem with our culture is that we don't know how to recognize genius," I said at party this past summer.

"What's your definition of genius?" my brother, very perceptively, asked.

I told him and the audience of my sister, her husband, and one of my sister's friend that I thought pretty much everyone had certain amount of genius, even if it's ditch digging genius. The problem is that some people get the idea that certain tasks are below them because of the status a culture places on certain jobs. Remember the "dot-com" boom of the 90's when everyone had have some kind of IT degree, because that was were the money, and more importantly the status, was?

When we lose the need to follow a divine mandate, we lose the ability to recognize our own genius and the genius of others.

Geez, all I wanted to say was how much I hated the radio and I spent the last hour dredging my brain for anything philosophical that I could fit into this particular subject.

Jesus and War

2005-08-29T19:23:00.000-04:00

Everyone one is guilty
We all got prints on the gun
If only the pure can do things
No work would ever get done

On and on and on the self-righteous
will condemn self-righteousness

Only the Sith deal in absolutes!

I have a job!

2005-08-25T17:08:00.000-04:00

Would you like some philosophy with you donuts and coffee? Yes, that is right, I will start my new job at Dunkin Donuts tomorrow morning.

Sunset at Minnewaska

2005-08-09T21:56:00.000-04:00

What a beautiful night it was!

The Family

2005-08-09T21:50:00.000-04:00

That's my sister and her husaband with kids and my mom in the back.

Cool View

2005-08-09T21:48:00.000-04:00

I took this one of my brother taking in a great view at Minnewaska.

Me and Some French Girls

2005-08-09T21:33:00.000-04:00

These are my sister's step daughters. They love their uncle Geoff

Minnewaska

2005-08-09T21:22:00.000-04:00

This is me and my brother at Minnewaska State Park in New Paltz, NY.

Leeloo The Terrible

2005-08-09T20:44:00.000-04:00

This is my brother's new kitten, Leeloo, as in Milla Jovovich's character in The Fifth Element. She also spent last weekend at my sister and brother-in-law's house. My French brother-in-law has two daughter's, eleven and thirteen, from a previous marriage. Though they live with their mother in France, they spend their summers here. They wanted to see the new kitten so my brother made the hour-and-a-half drive with her on Saturday. Now, my sister already has two adult cats. Zach is a surly, old, long haired, black cat, who doesn't particularly like other cats. Pixel is a stupid, but playful white and grey cat.

Everyone thought that it was a good idea to bring her, I wasn't so sure. Leeloo is a great cat but she is very aggressive in her playing. The shortest way to put it is that she is an Alpha Female. I didn't say anything because she is so much smaller than the other two cats, what could she hurt.

Well to say the least within an hour being there she was queen of the house. This petite three month old kitten was hissing at and chasing around two cats that were twice the size of her. She even ate their food! Even I hadn't foreseen that. It was friggen hilarious.

The little French girls loved her of course; she'll chase a piece of string for hours.

But all ended well. The other cats just stayed out of her way the rest of the time and she came home Sunday night.

Everyone Should See This

2005-08-08T22:53:00.000-04:00

If you're a Rush fan, a drummer, or if you have a pulse, you need to go here and see this: http://www.neilpeart.net/movies/yyz_vid.html

You will not be disappointed.

Ryoko Hirosue Is Hot

2005-08-08T11:11:00.000-04:00

I spent the weekend at my sister and brother-in-law's house just outside of Poughkeepsie, NY. My brother-in-law is French and we watch this French film called
"Wasabi", about this French Cop (Jean Reno) who finds out that his estranged Japanese girlfriend has just died and he has a 19-year-old daughter that he never knew about. His daughter is played by Japanese idol Ryoko Hirosue, and she is just plain amazing! And she's not just a pretty face. She has that quality that you just can't take your eyes off of, even if she was half as beautiful as she is. It is easy to spot but impossible to define; Pure unadulterated charisma. And her acting is incredible. There was not a moment in the film where she wasn't absolutely believable, no tear was forced no smile was fake. Hollywood should take note of this 25-year-old.

Is That All You Got?

2005-08-06T14:59:00.000-04:00

When the skeptic says that science has proven the nonexistence of God, is he trying to tell me that there is nothing beyond what we can experience? So, let me get this straight science has proven that there is nothing beyond the scope of science because it is not scientifically verifiable? That is the same as a man who says, "There can't be anything beyond my understanding, because I don't understand it."

Pissed Off Letter To guitar center

2005-08-02T17:06:00.000-04:00

So I answer five questions on a website and you know I am not capable of selling drums? What is up with that? I love going into a guitar center and buying stuff. I always got the impression that it was a great company. Everyone is nice, so, I figured that the people who run the company must be pretty cool too. I guess I was wrong. You know, this is the kind of small minded stuff that turns people off to big business. I'm not even sure I want to spend another dime at your stores. I guess I could just be over reacting and you might have a perfectly good explanation, but I'm pretty sure I will not get one. So, you can just completely disregard this email and not expect to see another red penny of my money. That probably doesn't mean much and I may never make enough money for it to mean anything to a big company like guitar center, but you never know.

Can I give you some advice. The world is changing and the way business was run for last twenty-some-odd years isn't going to work anymore. What I see happening in the near future is a return of the community. People live so spread out from each other. We thought this would bring greater privacy and freedom from the judgmental values of others. But, all it brought was a sense of profound isolation and loneliness. Now, you might be asking, "what does this have to do with guitar center?" Well, as people move back into small communities again, which is already happening in places (communities with their own, self contained downtowns), it will leave less room for bigger businesses. BALDERDASH! You might protest. But I say that this one little shift in the culture is what could mitigate many of the biggest problems that we face today.

If this makes any sense to anybody reading you should check out my blog @ geofftopia.blogspot.com

I'm Smart. Where's My Crown?

2005-07-27T20:02:00.000-04:00

What is the point of intelligence if it only makes it easier to justify stupid ideas?

Trouble In Iraq

2005-07-25T11:14:00.000-04:00

More bombings, more dead, unrest in the new government...

I agreed with the war, but I don't like the PCness of the President Bush's current strategy. I understand why he wants an Iraqi police force to deal with the insurgency but there trouble enough getting the new government together for them to properly deal with it.

A strong Iraqi police force can only follow an strong Iraqi government. I don't think we will see that until the Sunnis and the Shiite learn to play nice. The minorities need a larger say in the drafting of their own constitution.

We need more US led operations. Sure it will make us look bad for while but if the president doesn't step it up the alternative will be worse.

Michael Buble

2005-07-25T11:06:00.000-04:00

I finally found out the name of the chubby singer from that Starbucks commercial. You know the one with the really cute blonde girl in those cute little glasses. I'm not sure what I like more about the commercial the singer or the girl...What the hell am I thinking?

Anyway the singer's name is the title of this post. I was listening to Glenn Beck and he started talking about him and within two seconds of the song clip he played I knew it was the guy from the commercial.

If you like standards you should check him out. You will not be disappointed.

HEY! WHA' HAPPEN'!

2005-07-22T22:59:00.000-04:00

The older I get the less I make of the conection between emotional pain, and the things that happen us.

I'm Feeling Frisky

2005-07-22T17:01:00.000-04:00

I feel like making some more enemies.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Belfast Telegraph Home

Born gay or made gay ... which camp are you in?
Sexual orientation is fixed at birth and not nurtured, a new book claims. Anjana Ahuja reports on its theories
22 July 2005

There are people who can 'cure' you of your sexual orientation. If you are a woman, your eyes will no longer linger on tall, dark, musclebound Lotharios.

If you are a man, your heart will no longer flutter at the sight of a plunging cleavage or a smooth thigh - instead it will thump into action at the glimpse of a broad, taut torso or a neatly-trimmed moustache.

To at least 96% of readers - the heterosexuals - the idea that we can be persuaded to change something as fundamental as sexual orientation seems ridiculous.

So it is to homosexuals, who make up the remaining 4% and who are often told that their 'deviant' behaviour is a lifestyle choice.

Science has so far trodden carefully in the controversial debate about whether gays are born or made. Disparate pieces of evidence - such as homosexuality running in families, and identical twins having more similar sexual preferences than ordinary siblings - have long suggested that biology rather than upbringing shapes sexual preference.

Now two researchers are throwing out the caveats in an attempt to 'out' the bald scientific truth: we are born either straight or gay and nothing can be done to make us otherwise.

In Born Gay, Dr Glenn Wilson, reader in personality at the Institute of Psychiatry in London, and Dr Qazi Rahman, a psychobiologist at the University of East London, declare that "the accumulation of evidence from independent laboratories across the world has shown that the biological differences between gay and straight people cannot be ignored... our sexual preference is a fundamental and immutable component of our human nature".

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What about pedophiles? What makes a fully grown adult want to have sex with a child?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

According to Wilson and Rahman, the biological origin of sexual orientation means that discriminating against gays and lesbians is as justifiable as discriminating on the basis of eye colour or ethnicity. The authors have declined to reveal their own sexual orientation.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That is what this is all about!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So, why are some men born gay? Homosexuality tends to run in families, which has prompted a search for the so-called gay gene. Last month, biologists in Austria discovered that fruit flies can be turned gay by altering a single gene.

It is almost impossible that a single gene determining human sexual orientation exists: identical twins, who have identical genes, do not always have the same sexual preferences. But it does point to genetic influence.

"Gay men tend to have more gay brothers than straight men," Rahman says. "Heritability is thought to be around 30 to 40%, which means that around 30 to 40% of the variation in homosexuality is down to genes.

"Strictly speaking, it's better than zero (which would imply no role for genes) but that shows there's significant environmental variance."

And this, Rahman says, is where a "massive misunderstanding of the concept of environment" comes into play. Studies have shown that the popular idea of environment - parental upbringing, peer norms, the family home, schooling - have no effect whatsoever.

For example, the psychoanalytical idea that distant fathers or overbearing mothers sabotage their sons' sexual development is not borne out by evidence.

Wilson and Rahman dismiss such theories as "beyond the pale of science". In conversation, Rahman is more brutal, dismissing "95% of psychology as rubbish".

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That is a philosophical point of view, completely unsupported by any philosophy. Besides, how would you conduct experiments to prove it? How do you do you define what is and what is not a distant father or an overbearing mother?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The missing environmental link, the authors argue, is the womb. This would fit with findings in the early 90s that the brains of gay and straight men differ slightly.

Rahman explains: "We argue that genes produce differences in the brains of pre-straight and pre-gay foetuses and those differences might affect certain receptors in the brain that influence the activity of male sex hormones."

Put simply, Wilson and Rahman suspect that some male foetuses absorb low amounts of testosterone in certain parts of the brain; full absorption is needed for full masculinisation.

"In a foetus which has a genetic predisposition to be gay, these receptors are not as effective at soaking up testosterone. The result is that this slightly insensitive part of the brain follows the default development route, which is female."

In other words, the neural circuit that promotes sexual desire towards women is never laid down; the result is a male who is attracted to other men.

This also explains, the authors claim, why gay men show a 'mosaic' of female-like and male-like cognitive traits. In their handling of language and in their spatial awareness, for example, gay men are more similar to women than to heterosexual men.

The idea that the womb environment may have consequences for future siblings is interesting because researchers have noted a sibling pattern among gay men, called the 'big brother effect'.

The more older brothers a man has, the more likely he is to be gay. It is possible that maternal antibodies developed in early pregnancies may cross the placenta in later pregnancies to disrupt testosterone absorption.

Lesbianism may also be due to hormonal conditions in the womb (although scientists stress that lesbianism cannot always be examined as a direct parallel of male homosexuality - there is no 'big sister effect,' for example).

"There's a protein in the womb that protects female foetuses from excessive exposure to male sex hormones," Rahman says. "Perhaps this protein doesn't kick in early enough in lesbians."

Some brain circuits then follow the male development; a sexual preference for women may be a consequence.

As for bisexuality, there is no biological evidence that some people are turned on equally by both sexes. Physiological studies show that self-declared bisexuals exposed to straight and gay erotica are aroused by either one or the other - but not both. Academics suggest that bisexuals may be omnisexuals, with libidos so high that the gender of the target doesn't matter.

Homosexuality does not promote reproduction (for every gay father, there are between five and 10 straight fathers). So why haven't the relevant genes vanished from the human gene pool?

One suggestion is that, on the ancestral plains, same-sex social bonding - for both men and women - was necessary to reduce aggression within societies and encourage the sharing of resources. Bonobos, the closest primate species to humans, engage in homosexual behaviour for social purposes.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Adult bonobos also engage in fondling sexually immature bonobos for social purposes.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Another intriguing theory is that gay genes feminise men just enough to make them attractive as potential fathers. "You have these very nice heterosexual men who are 'gay-enabled' - who have a low dose of the gay gene," Rahman says. "It might make them more committed, more empathic, more charming and more attractive to women."

The benefits of having empathic men would stop gay genes being weeded out of the gene pool - and thus maintain a gay population. In fact, Rahman suggests, modern women may be altering their ideal of the perfect partner enough to influence evolution: "These days, women may not want these big guys to protect them - they're not necessarily looking for the macho type. We might even see homosexuality increase. It's an idea that Glenn and I have talked about. There's no reason to think that evolution won't change the goalposts - evolution changes us all the time."

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Look, I don't know what makes someone gay or not. And neither do these people. The point here is that they are passing off genetic determinism as a good science. There is just one problem. What if someone finds a homo-phobe (pedophile) gene? If the gay is determined to be gay, then the homo-phobe (pedophile) is determined to be a homo-phobe (pedophile)! If you can't tell the gay he is wrong then you can't tell the homo-phobe (pedophile) is wrong. Or is it that homophobia (pedophilia) is learned? How the hell do you know? You're so sure there is no correlation between environment and homosexuality, but it the only factor in homo-phobia (pedophilia)?

There are better reasons to not hate gays than this. Yes, this is the, "Hate the sin and not the sinner", argument. The Bible calls lots of things sin, and many of them are things I still do, and I do agree that too many Christians use certain verses in the Bible to bash people over the head, but that is a problem that can only be solved with a deeper understanding of the Bible itself.

Think about this: Is every desire something to be attained?

Beside, the centerpiece of Christianity has never been it's moral code. Jesus Christ and His work on the cross is the centerpiece. He takes our sin, any sin, and wipes it clean. He also doesn't simply change what we do. He changes what we want to do.

Paige Pooler is a Genius!

2005-07-22T16:15:00.000-04:00

Go here and see why: http://eyeswideapart.blogspot.com/

Stinky Doodoo PooPoo

2005-07-22T16:05:00.000-04:00

Just felt like lightning it up around here!

Piece of Cake Part Two

2005-07-22T15:17:00.000-04:00

I want to take a closer look at something I overlooked in part one.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

First, there is no God. In fact, all definitions of the word "God" are either self-contradictory, incoherent, meaningless or refuted by empirical, scientific evidence. Although the nature of the disproof will necessarily vary with the god under review, I will usually be raving against the modern monotheistic (or triune) Judeo-Christian-Islamic God, having (in various permutations) the characteristics of being, conscious, all-powerful (omnipotent), all-knowing (omniscient), all-good (omnibenevolent), immaterial, transcendent. immutable, immortal, infinite, omnipresent, disembodied and eternal.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I find the atheist's singular repugnance of the Abrahamic religions very interesting.

I'm not going to deal much with his talk of empirical or scientific evidence except to remind the class that this goes back to David Hume, who said something to the effect of, "If a statement is not scientifically, empirically or mathematically provable it should be disregarded as mere sophistry." Well, Doesn't that just sound all nice and peachy! Oh, except for the fact that it is not scientifically, mathematically, or empirically provable. "The statement fails it's own truth test," as Ravi Zacharias said.

Which brings me to my next point. If the God of the Abrahamic religions is so far out of the scientific/mathematic/empirical realm, where on earth did we get these ideas from? They might say, it is in our genes. But how did it get in our genes? Because of our ancestral heritage. Where did they get it from? I smell an infinite regress, to which the only answer they can give is: It just is; roll the bones.

And that is the meat of it. Am I supposed to feel intellectually inferior at the thunderous profundity of that answer? They certainly seem to be going for that effect. Why am I so inferior to say that: 1. God does exist in a form that is so beyond our human logic and 2. That He reveals Himself in small ways that fit into our understanding (see the post Hooray for Me for my thoughts on Kant) without losing his absolute "otherness", as G.K. Chesterton put it?

I have a Confession

2005-07-22T15:12:00.000-04:00

I've been watching reruns of the Gilmour Girls on ABC Family Network. I'd never really seen it before and I've decided that I actually like it. So there it is. I feel so much cleaner now that I've said it.

Piece of Cake

2005-07-20T23:22:00.000-04:00

Found this nonsense at ravingatheist.com

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basic Assumptions - Sun, Jul 21, 2002

Welcome to the first Rave of The Raving Atheist.

The following are the basic assumptions behind any pronouncements made in this blog:

First, there is no God. In fact, all definitions of the word "God" are either self-contradictory, incoherent, meaningless or refuted by empirical, scientific evidence. Although the nature of the disproof will necessarily vary with the god under review, I will usually be raving against the modern monotheistic (or triune) Judeo-Christian-Islamic God, having (in various permutations) the characteristics of being, conscious, all-powerful (omnipotent), all-knowing (omniscient), all-good (omnibenevolent), immaterial, transcendent. immutable, immortal, infinite, omnipresent, disembodied and eternal.

Such a god is as much a contradiction in terms as a square circle, and thus logically impossible, for numerous reasons including the following:

1) Omnipotence is impossible because God would, at a minimum, be unable to limit his powers, e.g., make a stone he cannot lift; if he could make such a stone, then his inability to lift it would defeat his omnipotence

2) God's omnipotence conflicts with his omniscience, because if God knows everything that is going to happen in advance, he cannot do anything in the present; he must simply watch the future unfold as previously foreseen, because changing anything would falsify his prior belief concerning the future;

3) God's omnipotence precludes him from having knowledge of any sensations or emotions associated with weakness, e.g., fear, frustration, despair, sickness, etc., and thus conflicts with him omniscience;

4) God's omniscience precludes him from having knowledge of any emotions associated with surprise or anticipation, and thus conflicts with itself;

5) God's omniscience conflicts with his disembodiedness, since a being without a body could not know how to drive, swim, or perform any activity associated with having a body;

6) God's omniscience conflicts with his omnibenevolence, since a morally perfect god could not have knowledge of feelings of hate, lust, or envy, or cruelty, etc.

7) God's omniscience and omnipotence conflict with his omnibenevolence, since a god who could prevent evil would do so unless he were unable to do so or unaware of the evil.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't think he even understands the words he is using. It's not exactly his fault. I blame modern evangelicalism. It doesn't seem to understand these words, but talks as if it does. And that is the problem. It has tried to make God fit into a logical system, thereby giving atheists the ability to do likewise. It's quite funny actually, they use dogma from the Bible to "prove" that God is not logical when the Bible clearly teaches that He is not logical. Read the book of Job. The early church fathers coined these words for the very purpose of illustrating that fact.

Congratulations! You just proved something that the Holy Scriptures teach; and something I already believe!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Second, Atheism is not merely one possible theological theory among many. Rather, it is the only true, provable theory, and all other religious theories are false and delusional. The mere fact that you believe or have faith that god exists does not make it so, anymore than unicorns, ghosts, leprechauns would exist simply because you believed in them or had faith in them. Nor does the fact that you have a legal right to believe in god prove that god exists. Similarly, the fact that American law purports to be "neutral" as between theism and atheism does not mean that the theories are equally plausible.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How does your world view deal with infinite regress?

How is it that you have proven a universal negative?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Third, because there is no god, any attempt to premise moral, social or political doctrine upon a belief in god is fruitless and potentially harmful. Laws, judicial decisions or social policies , which promote, accept or accommodate religious beliefs proceed upon false premises and may have harmful and unfair effects. The law should employ the same standards of logic and evidence in evaluating claims based on religious assertions that it does in adjudicating (and frequently rejecting) claims based on every other type of ideology and belief. In fact, the law should be governed by a militantly rationalistic and atheistic presumption that discourages all forms of irrational and superstitious conduct to the extent it conflicts, as it frequently does, with the general welfare or individual rights.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How do you know logic is true? You believing in it doesn't make it true. How do you know it is not an illusion? Your faith in logic is no different than my faith in God.

Define harmful and unfair. How do you decide what they are? Can you do it without starting from an absolute? If so, how is it that a universe that came into being by chance have any objective standard? If not, how can there be an absolute moral law without an absolute moral law giver?

How do you deal with the law of non-contradiction?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fourth, any person asserting a special individual right or attempting to dictate social policy based about a belief in god must first 1) define the god, 2) prove that the god exists and 3) demonstrate how the right or policy follows from the belief in god. Because there is no god, nobody will ever be able to do this.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I love how you guys apply laws to others that you don't apply to your-selves.

They like to think that they have the philosophical high ground, but they don't. As Emmanuel Kant showed us: the only thing that philosophy has proven is that God can neither be scientifically proven or disproved. Either way, It all comes down to faith. Just like the title to this dribble says: basic assupmtions.

I'm All In

2005-07-20T12:35:00.000-04:00

I'm reading Doyle Brunson's Super System (for purely educational reasons((yeah right))) and the first paragraph of the no-limit hold'em chapter he tells a story about how when you see a guy playing very conservative (tight) you would tell him, "You're gonna go like Broomcorn's uncle." The player would respond sharply, "Wadaya mean?" "Well, he anted himself to death."

Yeah that's me. What the hell am I doing anyway? I'm 27. I don't have a job (that's a story for another post). Never had a girlfriend. I still live at home.

I guess it's just taken me this long to realize that being brilliant isn't enough. I kept hoping that I would just keep doing what I'm doing and eventually someone would notice. Like, I would just happen to be in the right place one day and I would say the right thing in ear shot of the right person and he'd be like, "Hey you're a genius. Here is a $1,000,000.00 and a private room, where you can sit on you ass all day to think up brilliant stuff."

I never thought that would happen but it took me a long time to realize I seriously wished it would happen. But I know that if I had anything happen close to it, I would have to start building something before; not after. I would have to take some risks. "You're sittin' on a winning lottery ticket and you're to much of a @#$%! to cash it in!" says Chucky to Will in Good Will Hunting.

Well this blog was step one. My next goal is to get my own band together. I have a bassist who's down. I just need a drummer, (I know who I want, I just have to find him) and maybe another guitarist or keyboard player. I'm also thinking, vaguely, about doing a one man show. Some kind of mix of music comedy apologetics/philosophy. I'm thinking about a setting in a small fictional town. A town that is completely isolated, where I can create a microcosm of my entire world view.

Anyway, I hope my friends read this and hold my feet to the fire. I tired of saying I 'm gonna do stuff and then finding excuses to not do them. I'm all in!

Disregard, if it's already Been Said

2005-07-20T00:23:00.000-04:00

I was reading someone's blog a few minutes ago and a thought popped in my head. Do you think the blog world took off like it did because of the sense of community it has?

I'm not one of these "remember the good old days" people, but one thing we have lost in our modern culture is a sense of community. Everyone is so far apart. I long for that sense. And I almost grasped it, reading this person's blog.

I Love Irony

2005-07-19T23:41:00.000-04:00

Has anyone noticed that the blogger.com spell check doesn't recognize the word blog! I thought that was hilarious.

P.S. It does recognize blogger.com. Go figure.

Polemics R' Us

2005-07-18T22:40:00.000-04:00

There is no good place for bad philosophy.

The power of pain is bad philosophy/theology.

It's Official

2005-07-18T22:37:00.000-04:00

I'm a fat lazy American. The other day I was getting ice from the dispenser in my fridge and I got really pissed off because it was taking too long.

HOORAY FOR ME!

2005-07-14T14:30:00.000-04:00

If anyone doesn't know who Steve Brown is, go to either of these links: www.keylife.org, www.stevebrownetc.com. His Saturday night talk show, Steve Brown Etc. airs on two radio networks including Radio America, and a bunch of his cohorts (hey you guys!) promote the show on Wednesdays with a live web stream called Etcetera, which is also at the second link I wrote. You should listen to them, You can even hear me call in on the last two episodes of Etcetera. Everyone is really cool and very funny.

But anyway, Steve invites his listeners to send him questions about God and the Bible. So, this is what I wrote.

I've been reading a lot of philosophy lately, Emmanuel
Kant in particular, and I think I've come upon
something interesting. I don't think anyone can
underestimate the influence he has had on modern
culture and I have heard many Christian thinkers,
correctly, criticize Kant for leaving the door wide
open to secularism.

Now if I understand Kant correctly, he basically said
that we have synthetic a priori judgments that enable
us to experience and interpret reality. We cannot
apply these things to God because he exists beyond our
experience. He went on to say that when we, through
experience, come to learn something new, we are not
altering our view of reality. We are altering reality
to fit within this framework of understanding. So far
I think he is right. We are, as Ravi Zacharias puts
it, semi-transcendent beings.

I believe Kant's error was one of omission rather than
commission. He didn't seem to believe, as I do, that
God can, and does, reveal himself within the bounds of
our understanding and that our understanding of
reality must ultimately conform to God's Word. Which
is why the Bible is so important. It is our only
source of ultimate truth.

This is how he left the door open to secularism. We
are left with the idea that reality is subjective when
it clearly is not.

So what is my point? Secularism got it's foot in the
door because of the knee jerk reaction, By Christians,
to Kant. They only railed against the things that he
was wrong about and didn't understand the things he
was right about. Human nature, I guess.

So what do you think? Am I a heretic? Am I delutional?
Or, do I have a point? I'm always willing to hear that
I'm an idiot and I don't know what I'm talking about.

Thanks
Geoff Bosco (just some dude)

This was his response:

July 13, 2005

Mr. Geoff Bosco
gbosco@yahoo.com

Dear Geoff,

Thanks for your email. Appreciated your question on
Kant.

You, of course, are quite right about Kant. He is seen
as a demon... when, in fact, he was nothing of the sort.

The "omission" to which you refer is, however, a
rather big one.

One should read Kant and Kierkegaard, to wit, when
reason has taken one as far as one can go... the "leap"
is a good one. As you may know, Francis Schaeffer
hated Kierkegaard... but, then, he was reacting to the
"mush."

Just so you know, I believe that the "categorical
imperative" of Kant has an element of wishful thinking
to it as it was, I think, with Lewis. And you're
right... that's why the Bible is so important.

You are a good and thoughtful brother.

Bless,
Steve

Yay!!!!

The Significance of Insignificance

2005-07-06T22:33:00.000-04:00

I was in the philosophy section of my local Barnes and Noble tonight and I picked up a book, which was called Critiques of God, by Peter A. Angeles. In the preface the author listed some of the classic arguments for the existence for God and explained that the book was supposed to offer arguments to them.

He then explained that he knows that people less sophisticated than he need to believe in God to give their lives purpose and significance. Then he said (paraphrasing as always) he lives an insignificant life on a tiny planet and he didn't need to make himself the center of the universe to find comfort.

So let me get this right Pete, your life is so insignificant you felt the need to write a book about it? And what this center of the universe nonsense? Are you trying to tell me that when you got rid of God you replaced Him with something else besides yourself? If so, what was it? Your family? Service to others? Do onto others what you woul...?

Also, If there is no significance to any of this, why is it wrong to believe in the existence of God? Is it wrong? If it is, how do you posit a epistemological value on it, or anything else, without an absolute? Or, do you know it is wrong because it makes you feel bad? In that case, where do get off implying that my belief is based on emotions when your non-belief is just as emotional?

Or is the problem that, you believe in some sort of objective right and wrong, you just don't like it to be referred to as God? I believe that if you affirm something that is true, regardless of your own intentions, you affirm something about Jesus, because he said he is the Truth.

You "modern" thinkers amaze me! You think you've come so far since the days of Aristotle. You call it progress to rip out the foundations of causality, but all I can see from my side is an infinite regress back into Plato's Cave.

God Is a Relative Term?

2005-07-01T18:27:00.000-04:00

I got on Glenn Beck this afternoon! It was after the regular radio show was over so it wasn't on national radio. But all the Glenn Beck insiders, the subscribers to the website, heard it. He had two guests discussing Scientology, one was a skeptic the other a woman who does PR for the Church of Scientology.

First the skeptic went through a litany of claims about the church's beliefs. Among other things, He said that they believe that an alien being from a million years ago did some bad stuff to some other alien beings, rip their spirits out of their bodies, and sent the disembodied spirits to eternally wander the earth. Through time man evolved and these spirits attached themselves and all their bad stuff to us and that is reason for all the bad stuff plaguing mankind.

The other claim relevant to the topic at was that the they don't believe in the existence of God.

When the PR lady came on and was asked about the alien junk, she was like "OH, NO YOU DIDN'T!"...Um sorry, that was on Mauri Povich. Anyway, there were a few of her responses that just didn't fit together. Her answer to the alien stuff was that it was a small part of the religion, you didn't have to believe it, and that if a member did believe it then it was true for them.

Her response about their beliefs about God was truly striking. She quoted L. Ron Hubbard saying something like disbelief in God was stupid and if you want to do bad things to a society you remove the concept of God from it. Therefore proving that you can be a Christian and a Scientologist...Yeah right.

But that isn't what concerns me. I could go off and find some of his other quotes to contradict this, but I'm to lazy. Why waste mental energy when the philosophy here is so shoddy.

Her first answer implied a relativistic point of view. I had heard that the church's view on absolute reality swung this way and this lady just proved it. My question is how do you square that with a belief in an all powerful absolute deity? You can't. If God exists than objective right and wrong must exist. I know, I know. "Our concept of God is different from yours", then it's not the God I worship, and you can't be a Christian and be a Scientologist. At least not a well informed biblical Christian.

So what is my point here? I don't want to give the impression that I'm one of these back-woods fundamentalists but I'm to lazy to get further into right now except to say that I think that relativism is a bastardization of a truth of reality. Absolute truth exists and his name is Jesus. The flaw is our understanding of the truth.

Oh yeah, when I finally got on air I was nervous and all I got out was the relativism part of my argument. But it lead to some good radio so I wasn't too upset. I should have prepared my argument when I was on hold. Oh well, next time.

Dirty Old Men

2005-06-28T17:47:00.000-04:00

Yeah, I know it's been a while. I was listening to Glenn Beck this morning and he was talking about all these novels coming out for young teens that contain sexual content. He read a story which mentioned a book series called "Gossip Girls" and some others. Now I don't know how much of the content of these books is really inappropriate, I haven't read them, but here is what I do know: they were produced by a bunch of dirty old men in business suits who get off on ruining the innocence of young teenage girls. How do I know? You might ask. Because I have a dirty old man inside of me. And here is a secrete ladies: so does every other man. That being said, most of us manage to keep him inside and realize that the evil part of us is just that. But, there are some who just can't keep it inside. I mean why should they? Who is to say it is wrong to market books, with tag lines like, "No one wants to go to college as a virgin", to twelve year old girls? I think it G.K. Chesterton who pointed out the irony in this kind of thing. A man throws sexual morality out the window and he ends up bowing at the alter of innocence. Even the innocence of a child. In other words he reviles purity and ends up a twisted man going to the ends of the earth to find it, but when he does he's so twisted with hatred he can do nothing but destroy it. This is the reason why a guy lauds the sluts but when a nice girl walks in the room the whore loses her appeal.

Musical Object Lesson Part Two

2005-05-12T21:40:00.000-04:00

Scroll down to part one if you haven't read it yet, or if you don't feel like it I'll just recapitulate. My basic problem was I wanted to figure out what it was about certain songs that I liked and songs that I didn't like, for the purpose of shortening the period of time it takes me to decide if I like the artist singing the song enough to invest $14.00 on a cd. I found the solution when I noticed unity in the people who wrote the songs.

So it was that My friend Todd and I went to see "Oh Boy!", a local Jazz/Funk/Prog trio that we are friends with. Now I had seen them play once before at an open mic night and they played a few jazz standards I believe, but this time they played all originals and I was actually impressed with the compositions. Nothing incredible but very enjoyable. Now, the previous evening I played the album Dog By Mike Keneally for Todd and he flipped out over it, and since Oh Boy and some of Mike Keneally's stuff kinda sound similar he said something to the effect of, "I liked their set but there is something missing that Mike Keneally had."

"Mike Keneally is a genius," I said without missing a beat. I went on to explain that he was making the same mistake that I used to. He was simply looking at the art and not the artist.

On my way home that night, a thought popped into my head "Isn't it just like us humans to focus on the creation and not the Creator?" Just like St. Paul said, "...They exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator..." Rom; 1,25, ESV.

And then I realized something else. Ever since Nietzsche declared "God is dead" men have tried to make gods of themselves to larger degree than ever before in the history of mankind. This, I believe, has had two major effects that are relevant the subject at hand. One, since we were no longer obligated to follow any divine mandate, that nonsensical statement "You can be anything you want to be when you grow up," began to corrupt the minds of children that would grow up to write some of the worse songs of all time. Two, since life had no ultimate value and things only had the value we attach to them, there was no such thing as a bad song it was just a song that you don't like.

There is some-other stuff about this I wanted to say but I forgot what it was because I'm not a professional writer or philosopher. I never even went to college!(except for one semester). But it'll come back to me and I'll try to write it down so I don't forget it again.

Words Of Wisdom or Just Plain Stupidity

2005-04-29T17:27:00.000-04:00

Everything you think about me is right. Except that I'm much worse.

ridiculous!? Everyone is ridiculous. It is only when we admit our own ridiculousness that a person will try to be less ridiculous.

Sometimes my vocation gets in the way of me doing my job.

If you are so sure you are doing everything right, why are you so miserable?

I like being pissed off, it causes me to think up clever things to say.

Bumper stickers aren't funny. (at least that is what the bumper sticker on my car says)

Something Short

2005-04-27T18:07:00.000-04:00

So here I am. Writing about stuff. Hmmm, yes stuff...Oh, yeah, Baseball! Mets lost today. I'm not upset though. They've got a great team this year. I hoping for great things. I didn't expect to be saying this three weeks ago, since I started getting an inkling of the steroid mess a couple years ago and the Mets were sucking, I decided to take a break from baseball. I also couldn't take the "Millionaire Baseball Guy" thing either. It seemed the game had lost it's soul. And this is a guy who loves the game. There is nothing about baseball that is boring to me. Every pitch of a game is fascinating to me. So it wasn't easy for me to just walk away, after the 2001 season.

But then two things happened. I was in Walmart about a month ago, and I saw Field of Dreams DVD pretty cheap so I bought it. It has always been one of my favorite movies but I hadn't seen it in, like, five or six years. As I was watching I just realized how much I missed baseball and it grieved me. Then I was flipping through the channels a couple weeks ago and stopped on the Mets game. They had just lost their first five games. I started watching, not expecting anything. Then I felt something, There was a certain sense I got from watching this new Mets team. They were having FUN! They were enjoying themselves. They won that game and went on to win the next six games in a row.

So whats the moral here. I dunno. Maybe I'm a self righteous hypocrite who just needed an excuse to desert his floundering team? I wouldn't put it past me. But I realized something. Maybe they are all jack up on roids but where else am I going to see the game played at this level. These guys are the best of the best. And anyway steroids doesn't make a team, and it certainly doesn't make team as whole enjoy playing the game.

me televishun has makes me smartest poeples in the hole wide world

2005-04-25T02:08:00.000-04:00

I was about to write a long post about this article I read in a magazine yesterday, but then I realized it was the New York Times Magazine. Like we really need another "Hey, check out the imbicility at the New York Times" kinda stroy.

So sufice it to say that some guy was trying to say that the recent trend in tv shows being more comlex in their plot strucures makes people smarter. As if complxity=quality. Two words Dream Theatre. End Blog.

Musical Object Lesson Part One

2005-04-25T01:11:00.000-04:00

I am the kind of person who isn't comfortable not knowing why I feel certian ways about certain things. Por ejemplo; Music has always been a big part of my life. I used to wonder as a kid why I loved certain song I heard on the radio. I would try to love the other songs as well and they usually grew on me 'cause , hey, I'm a kid and I don't know any better.

As I got older and started to pick up the guitar, this slowly stopped working. I started to wonder what was different about the music I loved and the rest of the music that I didn't love. Or the music that I heard and liked at first but then I got tired of. Or the music I din't care for at first but then grew to love. I didn't realize it at the time, but, what I was searching for was a kind of philisophical holy grail: unity in diversity. We get the words universe and university from these two words. The job of the university was to find unity in diversity. In other words I was searching for the unifying factor in the diversity of the music that I loved.

I have always had eclectic tastes so stlye went right out the window right away. I did notice a strong theme in the meledy. Meledy in a song/composition was always what drew me in so I tried to analyze writing styles and though maybe the melodies of the songs I loved were composed first and then the harmonies were added or maybe the lyrics were written first and then the music was added, but none of these theories comforted me. I could use these as a yardstick to judge new music I heard to tell that it would have staying power.

Then something funny happened a few years ago. I had stopped even thinking about the whole thing when it started to make perfect sense. I guess the psychologists call it the byscociating mind. I got comfortable when I started thing about the people behind the music I love. The unifier was in the artist not in the art. What is the artist about? Good philosophy? Gifted musician? What do they value? Do I consistanly love the work of their entire career? I also noticed how similar these answers where to the answers I would give to these questions in regfard to myself; the artists I love were alot like me. Not across the board but in general. I also noticed the nigh amounts of critical aclaim my favorites got. Like Zappa, Steely Dan, Rush, Gentle Giant, Ben Folds, Seal, Mike Keneally, and others. I realized that I had found a rule to gauge pretty quickly weather some new music I heard, or I should say some new artist I heard would last with me.

Stay tuned for part two!

Choices And Wolrd View

2004-07-31T12:08:00.000-04:00

I was arguing politics with my friend Dan the other day, and he said, "you
just base who you vote for on religious beliefs." "Yeah? So, what?" I replied.
And that pretty much ended the discussion. What I should have said to him
was that everyone bases all their decisions based on their world view. You
can't divorce yourself from it, even if you don't realize what it is.

Now, no one person's world view is perfectly correct. How could it be?
But that is not to say that every world view is equally valid. Let's take my
friend Dan...please. No, just kidding. Anyway, Dan believes that there are no
moral absolutes, which allows him to be for socialized medicine and and
punitive taxation of the wealthy, but also be against big government. How
does that work?
Of course, it works for him because big government only consists of things
such as: them telling us what we can watch, what we can do in our
bedrooms, and what we can say. But does not consist of things such as:
telling us how much money we can make, big bloated government
beaurocrasies, like the one that would have to oversee a universal health care
program, and federal funding of education.

Of course I could probably point out flaws in my own world view, but I'll
leave that for other people. My point is, I can only make choices based on
what I think is right. No one can be 100% all the time or any of the time, for
that matter. Everyday we have to make choices the best we can based on the
tools God gave us. Carefully examine the results of each choice and ask God
for guidance and you will see where to correct yourself.

Hello

2004-07-30T22:54:00.000-04:00

Just testing