Fun Science Videos
Discover Magazine ran a contest for the best 2 minute video that explained basics behind String Theory. The winner is titled String Ducky. I think the narrator may be Dexter’s real-life seester, not to be confused with steupid Dee Dee. I just learned of the results this morning, which is quite a coincidence given our recent dinner conversations. The video reminded me of another scientific short I enjoyed. It is a 10 minute video promoting a book titled Imagining the Tenth Dimension. The video does a fantastic job illustrating the lower dimensions and gracefully moves to describe what it higher dimensions might entail. It concludes by explaining how the author believes this fits into popular variations of String Theory.
Dinner Talk: Intellegent Design
My son breached the topic of creation theories at dinner last night. He announced he is a staunch creationist. His sister quickly announced she believes in the big bang theory. What an exciting time to be a father! At first I was concerned they were too young to tackle such a weighty and confusing topic. They would need a basic understanding of physics, geology and chemistry in order to understand half the arguments.
Best cover what they can understand. This issue may be what fuels their interest in the other subjects. I figure I will continue the conversation little-by-little over our evening meals. Chances are Madison would resent even a short family meeting as some punishment and be less likely to speak her mind in the future.
My primary goal is to make clear that I am less concerned with their conclusions as I am by how they reach those conclusions. I hope to use this subject to teach them to value truth. I need them to identify weaknesses in their own conclusions rather than ignore them. There is no shame in answering “I don’t know” or “maybe”. It takes a big man to admit there are things he isn’t sure about.
I plan to start by discussing the essence of science: the scientific method, the role of observation and the nature of theories. From there I will move to my trademark talk about philosophers and sophists. My children already have a basic understanding of the two theories. I’ll use that to help explain why this debate is such a hot topic. What is each person fighting for? What is at stake? Finally I will explain how the debate regarding intelligent design often bounces between two separate issues: the origin of the universe, and the origin of species.
True, I buy into the creation account in Genesis, but only because there is no evidence in the text that indicates it is allegorical. All other symbolic stories (Revelation, Jesus’s parables) are wrapped in passages that identify them as such. Genesis bleeds into history we accept as fact. Be that as it may, I am well aware and won’t deny all the well crafted arguments that support a Big Bang, prehistoric Earth and macroevolution. Let us all hope it is enough to show them the twisted, selfish fight this noble pursuit has become. May they never enter the ring.
09.18.07Mean Girls
Mean Girls is a surprisingly entertaining film and especially educational for younger viewers. Lindsay Lohan plays a even-keel yet naive new student that strikes back at a very shallow clique of girls called “the plastics”. The movie is a comedy, but the plastic clique is a fair representation of the sort of shallow people found in any secondary school’s social heirarchy. These kids feed on the faults and insecurities of others. They take pride in hollow “social” accomplishments. They champion fickle fashion as an art or a virtue. They have no taste of their own. They have no true friends. Everyone is a tool in their eyes. Every alliance serves some selfish purpose. When they feel pity serves them best they work to create dramatic sob stories from their pampered, meaningless lives. They tear others down in order to artificially inflate their own self worth.
When we learn to laugh at ourselves, we are free to be human. The proud are easily mocked and scorned. When we embrace our foolishness, it is more difficult to shame us with it. I pity these shallow people for they have forged their own chains. Everyone is keen to the threat posed by others with vices similar to their own. Let me clarify with some examples. I was a nosy child, so I carried a deep-seated fear people would go through my stuff. I know liars that have issues trusting others. Likewise, shallow people assume everyone is as critical and unforgiving as they are. They are never free to be human and embrace real life. I imagine this fuels their bitter downward spiral.
The schools I attended did not emphasize building student’s character. Most of the rules I remember being enforced were designed to control and protect students and faculty or facilitate learning. The psychological tactics plastic people use often fall between the rules that are enforced. Even the most damaging offenses sound petty when brought before an authority. When I was young I was discouraged by what I perceived as their prosperity. I was so mislead I even adopted some of their values. Now I see the real fruits of that lifestyle. They never learn to love. Rather they endure relationships with people as selfish and loathsome as they are. They never serve a cause greater than themselves. They grow neurotic from trying to maintain a facade of perfection: never misstep; never exhale; never relax.
I am grateful that my children are humble and free. They know plastic people and have experienced their venom. Although I know the natural consequences of a shallow life, I still find it hard to forgive them and wish them well in my prayers. When my children turn to me for advice I don’t have easy responses. The godly response I must recommend isn’t one I understand. At that point it’s clear I’m asking them to be better people than I am.
04.4.07The Great Firewall of China
China has a long history of censoring all media outlets, including the Internet. Provide this simple website with a web address and it will tell you if the good people in China are permitted to read it.
03.15.07Co-Parenting Cold War
The nature of co-parenting has been a prominent thought in my head for about a year now. Co-parenting is an unnatural abortion created when our noble and corrupt natures are forced to compromise. Our corrupt nature is the root of even the most amicable divorces. Public conscience has constructed a means ensuring the pair can share the blessings and burdens of rearing children caught in the crossfire of a divorce. Co-parenting isn’t the intended order of things, but it is necessary.
Love motivates married couples to trust, forgive and compromise. Despite all this, raising a child is still a challenge. Now consider people that were unable to trust, forgive and compromise in the name of love. How do they raise a child without these tools?
The politics of some divorces are similar to those exercised by two nuclear armed counties. Allow me explain. Should any country fire modern nuclear weapons everyone loses–even neighboring countries. (Modern nuclear warheads are exponentially more powerful than Fat Man.) Pressing the big red button is never really an option, and you pray the other fella always remains sane and calm enough to understand that. Couples that were once intimate are capable of critically wounding each other. Just as in a nuclear strike, such an attack hurts everyone: children, relatives, both co-parents. When disagreements arise or stress mounts, both hope the other is rational and responsible enough to keep the finger off the button. To that end both co-parents trust, forgive and compromise but the motivation is more fear than love.
I do not mean to imply that fear is the only emotion that rules co-parents. I imagine most couples relate to my analogy to different degrees. My cold war analogy contains other facets that shed light on the mechanics of many divorced parents. I have highlighted the simplest and most common.