The Big Bang Theory

     I admit it.  I love nerd-based humor.  This series, about a group of "power nerds," demonstrates the oddities and quirks of the super-intelligent in a humorous fashion.  With a combined IQ over 590, the three main characters embark on the typical day to day tasks, one hopelessly in love with the beautiful woman who lives across the hall, another wholly unable to even speak in the presence of a woman, and the third, too intellectual to consider breeding worth his while.  True to life, this show is low on the debauchery meter and high on the geek-humor.  Plenty of jokes involving verbage the average person has absolutely no chance of deciphering paired with jokes made "on the level" of those of us with sub-160 IQ's, all the while making you wonder what ever would make a grown man decide he is going to transfer his personality into a robot, so that he may bless the world with his mind even after his body dies.  As difficult as it may be to believe, much of the humor and value of this show really is derived from situations that everyone finds themselves in at one time or another, they merely present themselves on the show in ways that we may not be overly-excited about in real life.  For example, perhaps you won't get a chance to visit the Large Hadron Collider in Switzerland, but chances are at one point or another you'll get the chance to do something you've always wanted to do, and maybe your friends will argue and try to bargain their way into accompanying you.  This is the show that can brighten my day every time.  Thought-worthy story, unpredictable jokes, quirky humor, and a gorgeous blonde neighbor.  How can you go wrong?
     

Op- Ed -itorium. Not a word? Piffle.

                Trifecta of Torment.  This is the title of an op-ed piece I read regarding the differences between democrat and republican policies on employment and financial matters.  I found this piece to be rather entertaining, though a bit slanted, as most op-ed’s tend to be.  This piece, to me, carries in its words a strong ethos, makes me believe what the writer is portraying.  Perhaps I find this to be the case because I agreed with him before I started reading, who knows?  The whole article, from my point of view emanates with logical statements, or logos.  It seems as though this article could sway the views of a non-extremist view, though I doubt anything will get through the hard-shell that is the extremist point of view from the right.  Perhaps the pathos meter is a bit lower than the others, but all in all I enjoyed reading the article, likely because it did agree mainly with my train of thought.

                Is Facebook a horrible, vapid waste of time?  I tend to lean toward yes.  But, as always, there is that little voice in the back of my head telling me if I remove my profile time and space could tear apart at the seams.  Okay, not quite to that extent, but for some people that truly seems to be the case.  As is the subject matter in the op-ed piece Facebook, I just can't quit you.  The author speaks of Facebook as though it is the “in” thing to have a profile.  Just as in the 90’s you weren’t “connected” unless you had a pager, and later, a cell-phone; you now cannot be “connected” unless you have a facebook page.  Sadly, this does seem to be the case for a lot of people; heck, I even have a facebook page, though I am careful not to use it much, and I never put anything deeply personal on there.  Just my paranoia perhaps.  I found myself agreeing with what this author had to say, though I was wishing it weren’t true.  Despite my need to disagree, this article was written in a very sensible manner, plainly stating how important Facebook is to survival in today’s “high-tech” times.

                An amusing article about the naivety of people was New York is Yours for the Taking, in this piece a sarcastic author explains how every New Yorker tries to fool themselves with a small town mentality.  As we know, New York is a MASSIVE city.  One should never leave anything where anyone could possibly get their hands on it.  Leave your phone in a cab?  Maybe everyone in your phone book will get a txt message asking when last they were tested.  Maybe, on the rare occasion, it will be returned by a kind soul.  But really what do you suppose the odds are of that actually happening in a city of 19 Million people (give or take)?  I agree mainly with the sarcastic, skeptical attitude I picked up through the words in this piece.  Through that, the piece has good ethos and pathos from my point of view.  Is it just me, or does it sound quite strange and awkward to incorporate words such as ethos, pathos, and logos to a paper? 

Just as I suspected...

ISTJ - "Trustee". Decisiveness in practical affairs. Guardian of time- honored institutions. Dependable. 11.6% of total population.

Take Free Jung Personality Test
personality tests by similarminds.com

Enneagram Test Results Type 1 Perfectionism |||||||||||||| 60% Type 2 Helpfulness |||||||||||| 43% Type 3 Image Awareness |||| 16% Type 4 Sensitivity |||||||||||| 43% Type 5 Detachment |||||||||||||||| 70% Type 6 Anxiety |||||||||||||| 53% Type 7 Adventurousness |||||||||||| 50% Type 8 Aggressiveness |||||||||||||| 56% Type 9 Calmness |||||||||||||||| 63% Your main type is 5 Your variant is self pres

Take Free Enneagram Personality Test
personality tests by similarminds.com

Main type	Variant

Take Free Enneagram Personality Test
personality tests by similarminds.com

      After taking three of these tests, two of the three have told me the same thing shown above, which I can relate to.  The third told me I was a "very social being, overly sensitive to external criticism."  I know the people in this class don't know me well, but this isn't me.  
      In regard to the results shown above, in short, they infer that I am a withdrawn personality, living in my own world.  I can see this being somewhat accurate as I am not the person who tends to be out to meet people.  As a matter of fact, I am not the person you want to talk to if you're looking for a sympathetic point of view in regard to the human race as a whole.  Personal problems?  I'll gladly listen and offer my sympathy, even try to cheer you up; but ask me for a sympathetic ear on a subject which I view as something we as a species have brought upon ourselves (which is most issues people will talk about regarding the human race) and I will not have much positive to say.  The results from my tests also speak of me having traits trending toward self-preservation.  True, but to a point.  I have been in bad situations, and know from experience that I will throw myself into the jet-blast from an F-18 on the flight deck of a carrier if it means I can stop you from being blown overboard into a 70-100 foot fall to the ocean, so I know I am not all about me.  That being said, I do tend to prepare for the worst while hoping for the best.  I have a "bug-out" bag which is always packed and in my car, I have freeze-dried food, and I possess wilderness survival skills that make me confident that, worst-case scenario, I have a better chance at survival than the average person.  
     I'm sure I sound like a conspiracy nutter.  I do not believe that something horrible is going to happen to decimate the human population.  I merely like the prospect of being prepared and knowledgeable enough to know I will survive.  I suppose this shows that, as the results say, I need to be knowledgeable and independent to be happy, eh?  Among my other "higher" scores is Calmness.  I never realized this was a personality trait; I guess I always thought of it more as a relaxing state of mind, temporary to the occasion.  
     The low score.  Image awareness.  This eludes to me not being concerned with impressing the people I meet or stressing over a first impression.  I don't believe that you can learn much of anything about someone from the "first impression."  The only thing you will accomplish through a first impression is a stereotypical judgment which is rarely 100% accurate.  It amuses me that people might decide they do or do not like me or someone else simply by looking at them.  I will not let you know much about me until I know you; I know it may not be a fair system, but I don't entrust my personal life to everyone I meet.  I don't believe in personality tests much more than I do first impressions.  While answering the questions, how many people will be 100% honest with every answer?  My money is on few to none.  Perhaps it is my skeptical side shining through, but people as a whole (not excluding myself or anyone else I know) have an inherent need to impress.  To make themselves sound better than they are.  I am citing no references for this because it is my opinion, and mine alone.  
     So the questions on the test are answered, in theory, honestly.  Now there is an algorithm that computes your personality traits and issues you with a personality type which is worded in a way which has been determined to be "least offensive" to the typical reader.   Part of my skepticism stems from the fact that I can take multiple tests and 1/3 of the results from similar tests tell me I love being around people while the others say I am a solitude-seeker.  Granted in this case 2/3 were pretty accurate to my personality, from my own point of view, I believe that if you already know how you think (and I suspect you do) then why are you taking these tests in the first place?  Unless, of course, it is for a college level writing class so  you may expunge the information into a blog and find out what your classmates and instructor thought of your documentation.   

Why Must We Hide Trash?

                Why do we choose to make such a visible problem as trash invisible?  Trash stinks.  Trash is ugly.  No one enjoys looking at mounds of garbage out of their kitchen window.  Many species are drawn to the smell and/or texture of garbage.  They view it as a source of food.  Most people, however, do not feel this way.  Anything that disturbs their view of suburbia is an unwanted eyesore.  I am not saying that I revel in the thought of seeing piles of trash everywhere I look, far from it.  What I am saying is it seems as though the human race as a whole will go to great lengths simply to avoid seeing a landfill, even when they know it is there.  “Out of sight, out of mind.”  This seems to be the common theme in regards to undesirable happenings in our culture.  In short, I believe the issue of garbage is made an “invisible” one simply because too many people would complain to their city, county, or state governments if they could see the public landfill that they were contributing to every week out their living room window while they’re watching TV and eating chips from a bag that will be in that landfill in less than a week.

                For every rule however, there is an exception.  Some people do seek out dumpsters and trash cans for anything ranging from food to lawn chairs.  Be it out of necessity or simply in an attempt to stretch a paycheck as far as one can, it seems a fairly common practice in some places. 

                What is it that makes our species so hands-off?  After we haul the garbage to the curb as far as we are concerned it no longer exists.  Thinking like this, however, is the sort of thing that leads to a landfill outside of New York city that can be seen from space.  But the good news is it cannot be seen from the city!  So glad the people generating the trash don’t have to look at it!  What happened to people composting their biodegradable trash?  Recycling things such as cans, bottles, and newspapers?  It seems these things are all but nonexistent of late, and I cannot help but wonder how large (or small) a difference it would have made over the last couple of decades if only a few thousand more people were more resourceful about using or re-using things that they regarded as useless trash. 

                As the article in “The Believer” states, “It’s an avoidance of addressing mortality, ephemerality, the deeper cost of the way we live. We generate as much trash as we do in part because we move at a speed that requires it. I don’t have time to take care of the stuff that surrounds me every day that is disposable, like coffee cups and diapers and tea bags and things that if I slowed down and paid attention to and shepherded, husbanded, nurtured, would last a lot longer. I wouldn’t have to replace them as often as I do. But who has time for that? We keep it cognitively and physically on the edges as much as we possibly can, and when we look at it head-on, it betrays the illusion that everything is clean and fine and humming along without any kind of hidden cost. And that’s just not true.”

                From this I derive that the point that Robin Nagle is trying to make is simple this: We generate more trash than we think.  It doesn’t bother us because we do not look for it.  When we do see it, it takes away our feeling that everything is clean and healthy, and that can be cause for self re-evaluation, something that very few human beings are fond of.  It brings to mind the old adage “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”  If you can’t see the trash, it won’t bother you.

How does Hydrogen act as a fuel?

    I have a problem.  I hate fossil fuels.  Fossil fuels are something I view as a major source of not only pollution, but also of a wide-stretching corruption that plagues our planet.  It is a topic I have spent much time thinking about, and it seems there MUST be a better way.  One way that I find particularly interesting is the idea of Hydrogen being used as a fuel.  After all, the only byproducts created by burning Hydrogen gas are Oxygen and Water Vapor, with a chance of some Nitrogen compounds.  What could be more eco-friendly?  Naturally this is a subject of varying opinions and ideas.  Some say Hydrogen can not be used as a fuel because it requires vast amounts of energy to generate the Hydrogen in the first place.  Others say it is much more viable than others kinds of fuel.  What do I say?  I say it's time to do my own research on the subject!

The Cows Have It! (In my opinion)

   Almond, Rice, or Dairy?  I'm talking about milk, of course.  Some people say one is healthier than another... personally I have always loved good, old fashioned, Whole milk.  All dairy, all the fat.  In recent years, however, I have started trying different types of milk, from Skim to Almond.  I must say I enjoy the taste of nearly all of them, though Skim to me is reminiscent of water that has been colored white.  What is to gain from drinking the watery Skim instead of my thick and creamy Whole milk?  According to the "Wise Geek," Whole milk has approximately 16 times the fat content of Skim (nonfat) milk, yet only a mere 64 calories difference in an 8 oz. glass.  While this is a far cry from "almost the same," I ask you:  Is it worth sacrificing that delicious taste for less saturated fat?  Many will answer this question with a resounding "YES!!!"  I understand, perhaps you want only what is "healthy,"  or perhaps you prefer the diluted taste.  Whatever the case, it is your decision.
    So how does Dairy milk stack up against Rice or Almond milk?  According to this site, Soy or Hemp milk would be relatively "on par" with 2% Dairy milk as far as fat content, caloric value, and protein per serving, while Rice and Almond milk fall short in all of these categories.  Lower fat, fewer calories, with less protein and fewer other vitamins than the other types of milk mentioned.  It seems from a health standpoint, that if you drink milk with 2% milkfat or less, you're getting the same nutritional value as you would were you drinking Soy or Hemp milk.  Unless I'm forgetting something... Ah yes!  Most of the fats from cows milk are saturated fats!  These fats are said to be less beneficial than the unsaturated fats you find in other types of milk. 
    There are many variables to consider in this all-so-important decision in which milk to drink.  Personally, I enjoy the taste of Almond milk nearly as much as that of my Whole dairy milk, but I will stick to whatever tickles my fancy at the time.  Time to get a glass of fat... er, I mean milk!

1st Entry

     So here I am, being the "over-achiever."  More than 24 hours to go before this post is "due," and I'm writing it up anyway.  For those who may not have guessed from the title of this blog, my name is, in fact, Sean.  I am writing this for my WRIT 101 course (and have no qualms about it, for the record).  A bit about me... following high school I joined the Navy.  "See the world" they said.  HA!  I saw plenty of blue, and plenty of brown.  After 6 years, I separated from the service and moved back to Missoula.  Since then I have been trying to figure out just who I was when I left, and who I am now.  I do know this though: I love the outdoors.  Nothing in this world makes me happier than being miles away from "civilization," be it by myself or with a group of friends.  A trip to the hot springs, or disappearing for a several-day hike... it's no matter, it's all wonderful.  I am also a big fan of dogs, my sled team will tell you the same as they grow fat and happy in their "golden years."  I don't much enjoy talking about myself directed to a computer screen, so that may be all you get for now in the "me" category.

     Unless, of course, you consider me discussing my like or dislike of reading!  Sneaky, sneaky, eh?  I must confess I've always been a bit of a book-loving geek.  When I was young, my parents had to tell me to put the book down and go outside to play in the summertime.  I never really had a specific genre I stuck to.  I do remember one book that I truly enjoyed reading, and cannot explain WHY I enjoyed reading it so much.  That book was Shogun, by James Clavell.  I would re-read that book in a heartbeat; and I cannot tell you why.  There really was nothing incredibly special about the story, the descriptiveness in the writing, or even the characters.  I simply loved reading it.  One thing I have learned through the books I've read is this:  Even a "bad" book has its good points.  Perhaps you would never read it a second time, but it's never ALL bad.