Big as the Universe, Small as a Quark

Just found this totally cool example of technology helping us to better understand a concept as large as the size of the universe. My hat’s off (I was wearing one) to the folks at Florida States for their Power of Ten demonstration. Our universe is so unbelievably huge and at the same time intricately complex that it seems unrealistic to believe it all came about as a result of an accident, rather than as a design of an intelligent being. [via What in Tarnation?!?]

A Day in the Life of…

Saw this deal over at the LivingRoom called Blogger Idol. I was like, “What the heck is this?” Anyway, it’s a multi-blog, organized-weekly, topic birthing deelio… or something. We’re up to Blogger Idol: Week 3 so feel free to participate. These week’s starter is, ‘A day in the life of…’

A Day in the Life of Someone Empowered

It’s true, it’s really true. I’m sure you’ve heard someone say it. Does this sound familiar? “Life is what you make it.” Sure you have. But like so many things, it goes in one ear and out to the street.

Making the best of a bad situation is something that comes easy to some people, not me per say. But we all know “the guy” who upon arriving at our camping ground in frigid temperatures, amidst the rainy drizzle who announces, “Let’s get those tents set up!”

At that point in time, you’ve got a choice. Are we gonna pack it in and head home for microwave dinners, or are we gonna make the most of it and possibly enjoy ourselves despite our circumstances?

Desirable Yes, Feasible No?

Is it possible to have fun all the time? Hell no. Or reverse it, do some people somehow enjoy being miserable? Some do.

Despite our default personality settings, we can learn to be this kind of person even if we’re preset to depression first, joy only if necessary.

Finding the Positive

Sure, while every other blog in the world is talking about Janet’s nipple or the Democratic Primaries, I’ve chosen to focus on more healthy news-bites.

The surprising part is that they’re not to hard to find. Just this morning I learned about Fish OK After Extinguishing Fire. Misleading title and all, it’s still funny and it’s good news. (Not good enough to warrant a post, but you see what I’m saying.)

Look around and you can discover that Fran Lasee set a record by bowling a 834 The trick is he’s 83. The article didn’t mention ole Fran lives at the ally, eats only hot dogs and has no social life, but that’s another story.

emPower to the People

We all have the potential to see the good in others. Forgiveness is an option. Truth is worthwhile. Faith and hope are great, but remember, greatest of these is love.

Earth Is Self-Healing

Everything changes. And it’s doing it all the time. Today scientists are worried about global warming, but other scientists say that the earth has already taken care of that problem before. Still others say global warming is a myth stemmed from too small a sample size. Whatever the case, what they say it true today is really just a theory that tomorrow may prove has little truth to it. The way it feels here in Chicago it’s tough to believe anything is getting warmer.

What’s the Line on Rupert?

Now that the All-Star Survivor series is gearing up (right after the Superbowl), of course Vegas has to get some action on this. The media is onboard, as well as the many fan sites. So… who would you drop money on? All I know is that any bet placed before the first show should have amazing odds. Right now it looks like popularity mirrors prediction, hmm…

Music to Sooth the Savage Beast

A topic for some time has been, “Does music benefit developing babies?” Studies indicate that it does. Not just newborns, but pre-borns too. Everyone knows that teenagers love it, but some forget that the message of the music affects us too, whether the kids recognize it or not. What kind of world would this be without music? So pop in your Mozart, or Miles Davis, or Macy Gray but I don’t know how healthy it would be for your toddler to hear the latest Outkast CD.

Hitchhiker’s Game Online

Doesn’t quite qualify as a videogame, but what else would you call it? Back in the day, we were desparate for anything to play at home, so something as bland as the text-based “adventure” The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy was super cool! Today? Not so much. [via Dead Parrots]

Stossel Doesn’t Care

Folks may know that I don’t think much of the media in general. Rather than reporting just the facts, it seems that journalists have agendas, on both sides of the political isle. But somehow, John Stossel is different. He doesn’t care. He doesn’t care what his contemporaries think of him. He’s just interested in uncovering scams and telling us about all the hush-hush stories that the rest of the media doesn’t want to cover. His new book is out, predictably titled Give Me a Break. Haven’t bought it yet, but chances are it’s filled with good stuff.

Kids Lift Car, Saves Dad

Adrenaline is a mightly thing. Just ask Michael Sinnett after his 13- and 12-year-olds lifted the family van off of him. Why he was under the van to fix a flat is beyond me.

NutriGrain Commercial Madness

Saw over on Dead Parrotts a link to this hilarious NutriGrain commerical. So bizarre it’s not even funny, yet, it’s very funny. You be the judge.

LotR: Return of the King

I’ve always thought the first-person perspective makes video games more realistic. Why they continue to make third-person or isometric-view games is beyond me. With that said, Return of the King was a fun game (albeit short) especially for those fans of the books/movies. There’s a great deal of film footage is this game, which is especially cool for the console gamers among us who aren’t generally used to such bonuses. (On the PC, the game design is very much a console game first, ported to the PC later.) I give it a 7 out of 10 and recommend it.

Phatmass and My Own Personal Gravity

From a friend’s site I came across phatmass. Makes me think P.M. Dawn with a Lutheran bent. Anything that brings to mind questions of faith and eternity is a good thing in my book. Wish they’d complete their mission statement though, ‘cuz it’s nice to see how well their walk matches their talk.

Don’t Mess with Grandma

Oregon Grandma tracks down car thieves and teaches them the finer points of respecting their elders. How the reporter neglected to snap a photo is beyond me.

In Defense of Marriage

The first thing that anyone who reads this should know is, I’m not anti-gay. The reason that I believe that marriage should be one man and one woman is because I’m pro-child. In order to give children the best opportunity at a good life, centuries of human history have shown that this is best design for a family and statistics prove this out. Mitt Romney feels similarly. It’s tragic that a few revisionist judges can alter America so greatly, so quickly. Here’s hoping that the citizens will get a chance to voice their opinion and vote on the subject.

Gates Getting then Giving

There’s been a insidious movement underfoot here in America to portray the rich as somehow evil. If you’re making so much money, you must be doing something wrong or illegal, right? Not necessarily and Bill Gates is a prime example of a (very) rich person who gives generously of the resources he’s acquired. America, a free market economy, uses money as a motivational tool to increase productivity and innovation. Let’s not handicap ourselves with this harmful line of thinking and all work towards being generous as well. [via Thunderstruck]

Arguments for the Pre-Born

If you’ve never seen a 4D ultrasound, it’s truly amazing. There are galleries of these images all over the Web. Most of these images are taken in the second trimester of development. The whole “is it a baby or not” argument seems pretty straight-forward if you look at things logically. What follows is hypothetical dialog between a pro-life and pro-choice person on whether a pre-born child is human.

Unborn vs. Newborn: Which is Human?

After some preliminary discussions…

Pro-Life: “Do you think that newborns are persons?”

Pro-Choice: “Yes, of course. Everyone does.”

Pro-Life: “What are the differences between fetuses and newborns?”

Pro-Choice: “There are many, important differences.”

Pro-Life: “If we look at those differences to see if they are morally relevant then we can answer the question if it’s morally permissible to kill fetuses and not kill newborns.”

Pro-Choice: “Sounds reasonable.”

Pro-Life: “As it turns out, unborns differ from the newborns in just four ways which I pose are not relevant to its status as a human being. Those four ways are Size, Level of Development, Environment, and Degree of Dependency. The acronym SLED is a helpful reminder of those differences.”

• Size: “The unborn are smaller than the newly born. But does size have a correlation to human rights? Men are generally larger than women, does that mean they deserve more rights? Is Shaquel O’Neal more of a person than Hillary Clinton simply because he is larger? Clearly size is not an criteria for determining whether something is a person.”
• Level of development: “True, the unborn are less developed than newborns, but this too is morally irrelevant when it comes to assessing humanhood. A newborn is less developed than a toddler. A toddler is less developed than an adolescent. An adolescent is less developed than an adult. But all are considered equally human.”

  Is a child of four, for example, less of a person because she has not yet developed her sexual organs? Is a retarded child whose brain function is less than his classmate still not equally human? These absurd conclusions follow from defining persons based on what they can do rather than what they are.

  If you follow that line of thinking, we’re creating newer robots that can behave like people. Are they considered persons? If personhood is only a developing, gradual thing, then we are never fully human because we continue to grow intellectually and emotionally. As Albert Schweitzer said at age 70, ‘I still don’t know what I want to do when I grow up.’

  It follows, then, that the ability to perform human functions is not a necessary condition for human personhood. People who are unconscious do not have the present capacity to perform personal acts. We don’t kill them because of it. Nor should we kill the unborn.

• Environment: “True, the unborn is located in a different place, but how does a change in location suddenly change a non-human entity into a human one? Did you stop being human when you walked from your house to the car? From the kitchen to the den? Clearly, where one is has no bearing on who one is.”

  A child in the incubator of her mother’s womb is no less a child than the one being sustained by neonatal technology. I know, for example, of a baby girl named Rachel who was born at 24 weeks gestation. At the time of her birth, she weighed less than a pound and could fit into the palm of your hand. The hospital staff worked heroically to save her life and now she is a healthy toddler.

  But let’s assume that instead of saving baby Rachel’s life at 24 weeks, the doctor came into her room and killed her while she was resting in her father’s hand. We would consider that an outrage, wouldn’t we? But do you know that the same baby can be killed through legalized abortion through all nine months of pregnancy simply because she is located six inches away in her mother’s womb?

  Ladies and gentlemen, you do not stop being human simply because you have a different address.

• Degree of dependency: “If viability is what makes one human, then all those dependent on kidney machines, heart pace-makers, and insulin would have to be declared non-persons. There is no ethical difference between an unborn child who is plugged into and dependent upon its mother and a kidney patient who is plugged into and dependent upon a kidney machine.”

  Siamese twins do not forfeit their right to live simply because they depend on each others’ circulatory systems.

  We can take this a step further. Imagine that you are stranded in the woods one freezing night in January, but you have plenty of warm clothing. While searching for help, you encounter a lost toddler wearing shorts and a t-shirt.

  Scantily dressed, he will freeze to death within the hour if no one helps him. Realizing this child depends totally on you for his survival, you promptly excuse yourself from having any moral obligation to him. In fact, you go one step further. You feed him to the wolves because, after all, he cannot survive without you. Obviously, you wouldn’t do that. Neither would any abortion advocate I know.

  In fact, the most strident defender of abortion would do exactly as you or I would do in that situation: She would pick the child up and wrap him inside her own jacket, using her own body to sustain him. She would remain with him all night if need be, despite inconvenience or hardship until he was delivered safely to his parents. She would protect the child precisely because he depends solely on her for survival. It would not matter that he was an unwanted intruder or an uninvited guest.

  And yet when it comes to the woman’s own unborn offspring, the moral logic of abortion advocates is that she has no responsibility to the child precisely because it depends on her for protection. In other words, he can be legally killed because of his need. This is absurd.

Pro-Life: “We can see, then, that the unborn child differs from a newborn child in only four ways—size, level of development, environment, and degree of dependency—and none of those differences are good reasons for disqualifying it as fully human.”

Pro-Choice: “You know, I’ve been listening to you pro-lifers for 30 years. I’ve had people shove rosary beads at me, tell me I was going to burn in hell, and even had evangelicals praying for my soul. But this is the first time I have ever heard one of you right-to-lifers explain why you believe what you believe. I guess I will have to give it some thought.”