Spring anyone?

I'm ready for Spring! Or a warmer climate. The day following Christmas this year was warm for Northeast Ohio. Warm for anywhere north of Georgia for that matter.
I was sick the entire holiday weekend, but I was able to feel the warm and sunny, albeit breezy air that day. I believe we topped out in the low to mid-60's (around 17 degrees celsius for my international friends.)
It was a holiday weekend like I always hope for - snow on Christmas Day, and warmth thereafter! If only life really worked that way. But reality bites and alas ... that was a freak of nature up here.
It was the kind of experience that makes one long for the sweet touch of Spring - all the while knowing there's another 4 months of winter! At least!
So, I get to thinking - for a crazy minute ... about living in Florida. What's worse - I got the idea from what has to be the saddest goddamn movie I have ever seen. Marley and Me. Now - it was a great flick - don't get me wrong. Very realistic portrayal of life, funny at all the right times, but in the end - the saddest film known to mankind. I'm not even lying. I felt violated - I hadn't signed up for that and it pissed me off.
Anyway - so I start thinking about, "could I live in Florida?" The answer of course is probably no way in hell, but it got me to thinking about finding a warmer climate. So I'll be searching - probably in vain - for a more hospitable place to winter.
Good thing is - my girlfriend is kinda looking for the same change, so it works out well! We're both full of wanderlust.
Meanwhile, I'll suffer - like I do every year - through the harsh, killing cold of a Northeast Ohio winter - until orange barrel season comes around once again.
Cheers!

Global warming and local weathermen!

OK - I'll probably get some people fired up with this one, but I just had to say ... something. The front page of the Cleveland Plain Dealer today has a pic and a headline:" Global Warming - Did we cause this? (picture of polar bear stranded on a small strip of ice surrounded by water) These guys don't think so ..." Below - pictures of 5 local weathermen: Andre Bernier, Dick Goddard, Mark Johnson, Jon Loufman, and Mark Nolan. Now, it seems there's a raging debate between day-to-day meterologists, whose job it is to predict and report local weather conditions and climatologists, whose job it is to collect and study mountains of data from a span of thousands of years to predict the likelihood of weather conditions in our near and not-so-near future. Climatologists take a stance that the United Nations 1200 member Intergovernal Panel on Climate Change, the National Academy of Science, and the American Meteorlogical Society takes - the Earth's climate is warming and the human burning of fossil fuels in cars and industry is helping to accelerate that warming. The local weather guys say that these three groups - the latter, responsible for giving them certification - are wrong! Now my first instinct is to laugh. These guys can't even predict the weather here in Cleveland - I predict the weather better by expecting the exact opposite of what they have to say (and I'm right about 90% of the time.) By the way, the last guy I mentioned doesn't even do the weather anymore he's become Ron Burgundy. Anyway, the local guys blame the warming trend on events that they believe are cyclical. Now, the Earth does go through cycles. The sun does go through cycles as well.Channel 8 (Fox news) weathermen Bernier and Goddard, both believe that solar cycles are to blame. OK - good hypothesis - let's investigate. Solar cycles osscilate in a cycle that spans about 10 years. So every ten years, there's a peak and a dip. Starting in 1975, at the bottom, solar flare activity rose consistently until 1980, when it reached a peak. It then hit a low in 1985 and so on and so on. So, in 1990 there was a peak - in ' 95 a dip - in 2000 a peak - in '05 a dip and now we're on the upswing. Solar flares have been consistent. However, since 1960, there has been an unobstructed rise in CO2 levels - from 315 parts per million to 385 ppm as measured atop Mauna Loa, Hawaii. In addition, global temperatures (in a graph dating back to 1860) show cyclical highs and lows with some slow progress upward until about 1980 when they have moved far more upward and never looked back. The average global temp is now far higher than ever before found in recorded history and CO2 levels are astronomically higher than ever recorded in ice studies that date back thousands of years.So basically, the solar flare argument just won't flush. The data does not correspond. Perhaps our local guys haven't been keeping up on the data. The article then goes on to quote Jon Loufman as saying, "Climate records also show that long before civilization, the Vikings settled in Greenland because it was warm enough."OK - the Vikings settled in Greenland about 1000 years ago. At that time, the Earth was on the apex of a warming cycle - the same cycle these guys are touting. It then fell into a "lesser" ice age that bottomed out about the year 1600. AND - almost all of Greenland's Viking civilization was near the coast, which is even today, more hospitable than even a few miles inland. But while the argument he makes that Earth was in a warm cycle is valid ... there is the fact that the temperatures at that time were nowhere near as warm as they are spiking now. Finally, the argument sways to the idea that these guys looks at numbers all the time. They claim they're used to seeing weather extremes all the time. "Why should we think that anything's different today just because one day's hot and another day has heavy rain?" They see it as a natural variability. This is perhaps the most disturbing of the arguments. Ignorance is bliss. The local guys admit to not being privy to the massive amounts of data that climatologists compile. It is not their field. That would be like me, an air crew scheduler, talking to the press about how I feel a plane will respond to a coming storm. Wouldn't that be the pilot's place to say? I have some knowledge but I'm not the expert. I call this way of irresponsible thinking about global warming "Titanic Theory." "God himself cannot sink this ship."Well kiss my left nut - it's 23,000 feet under the sea isn't it?

I wish ...

So a week has past since the presidential election - Happy Veteran's Day by the way!) The day after the election there was an odd ... quiet among those who, just the previous day were rabidly supporting McCain. With his loss, they had little to say. Graciously, though I could have rubbed it in, I remained quiet about my win within earshot of these people - out of respect. Though I don't agree with their views on some things - they are still my fellow Americans and I don't wish to offend them by gloating.
However, over the course of the week since the election - "they" have begun the grumbling that I knew was coming. A grumbling not unlike that we heard throughout the 1990's, when Bill Clinton was president. Bill Maher touched on this on his HBO show recently and said that he didn't want to see a return to the 90's when the GOP chased after Clinton over made-up offenses ... he didn't want to see a return to the 90's except the part about peace and prosperity.
I agree with this. President-elect Obama has made it clear that he wants to work together, in a bi-partisan manner to fix the wrong in this country. If the GOP attacks him over every little misplaced word as they did (and still do) with the Clinton's - then they will only prove that they are the problem - not the solution.
If Obama gets into the White House and starts enacting similar bone-headed policies to W's - then hey - I'll be right there with them. But until that point in time - the GOP, Rush Limbaugh, Mike Drudge, Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, Glen Beck, Bill Kristol, and FOX news needs to shut the hell up. Report the news - explain their viewpoints - it's their right - but bashing a president who is trying to reunite this country, fix an economy, return us to our constitutional rights, bring back a progressive and prosperous America, and help us to heal the wounds of all bigotry will not illuminate them in a positive way and it will only hurt them in the end.
It always sucks to lose - I know - I've had 8 years of it. Even most of the people that voted for W now regret it. So I wish they'd just give the new guy a chance before they start bashing every thing he does.

A New Era

Today, I have reason to be happy. Not just because my choice for president won last night, but because the choice brings historical change to America. I am happy for the millions of African-Americans in this country who can finally realize that their children can grow up to be president. And it bodes well for the millions of minorities in this country whose children can also realize that dream.
But most importantly, the election of Barack Obama ushers-in the possibility of real change for this country - a country that has lost it's way over the last few decades and most specifically, over the last 8 years. Obama's election is not only a beacon of hope for black Americans, but it resonates hope for ALL Americans. My hope is that over the next decade, we won't even take race into consideration - that it won't be how whites voted, or how blacks voted, or Hispanic, or Asian - but simply how America voted.
Obama brings with him, eloquence, intelligence, dignity, perseverance, and strength. Our reputation around the world is tarnished. Obama has an opportunity to turn that around - and I for one think he will. His very election has garnered praise and support from our allies - allies alienated by the last eight years of W. What the Bush administration and Republicans at large, fail to see is that in order to secure our country, strong alliances around the world are a necessity!
There are a number of complicated issues that face the new president - security, the economy, the war in Iraq, health care, taxes, education, energy ... to name a few. It will not be easy to deal with these issues and it won't be easy to undo the damage done by the previous administration. However, I am confident that America has chosen the right individual to do it. Not only do I feel that Obama has the intelligence to make the crucial decisions, I am confident that he will surround himself with individuals who will best assist him.
Bottom line ... today, November 5, 2008 is day one of an era that can make a difference. There will be tests - it will not be easy, but at least we now have a chance.
Goodbye W - worst president in American history ... have a good time on the ranch. Eat your prunes - you'll stay regular.
Rot in hell Cheney.

My road to Angnosticism

I was born on Easter Sunday, April 6, 1969. My name, Christopher, is Hebrew in origin and literally means, "Christ Bearer."
I was born into a "mixed" family. My father is from a long line of protestants that settled the Shenandoah Valley region of Virginia. He was Episcopalian (a.k.a. - the Church of England in America.) My mother is from a long line of Roman Catholic Hungarians. (In the eyes of the Catholic Church, my parents were told that their marriage was a mixed marriage.)
I was baptised at about the ripe old age of six weeks. This was an unthinkable tragedy among my mother's family members. It was (and still is in many places), believed among Catholics that if a baby died prior to baptism, his or her "soul" would never achieve Heaven nor Hell, but instead float around forever in a state of "Limbo." So, finally to give my relatives an unfettered solace of mind, I was baptised by a priest in St. Stephen's of Hungary Catholic Church in Allentown, Pennsylvania sometime in the late Spring of 1969.
Growing up, I have only vague recollections of my time in Church. My parents would occasionally take me to the local Catholic Church in my home town of Manassas, Virginia and I think that at one point, we went semi-religiously. Other than that, I went to Church only when I visited my grandmother in Allentown or at Holidays (Christmas and Easter.) Church was always a big production for my grandmother. There was always a great deal of stress involved in preparation for the event. My father always pushed to attend Easter Sunrise service at the National Cathedral in nearby Washington, D.C. but my mother shunned the idea of driving into the city all but one time I believe.
At any rate, that's about all I remember from childhood on the subject. Yes, I learned the Lord's Prayer. Yes I learned the robotic drone of the Catholic Mass. Yes, I said my prayers at night and said Grace before dinner. I was a typical, semi-practicing Christian American, much like most everyone else.
The first event I remember that labeled religion as suspect in my mind was the Jonestown Massacre of 1978. Nine-hundred and nine Jonestown parishioners died of cyanide poisoning in what leader Jim Jones referred to as "revolutionary suicide." It was the largest mass suicide event in over 1900 years of history. Until the events of September 11, 2001, it was the single largest, non-natural loss of civilian life in American history. It forever ingrained a hatred of "cult" religion in my mind. This was the beginning for me.
Into my teen years, I experienced a mix of religious viewpoints. I still considered myself Catholic and a believer in God and the Bible. I had little experience with protestant churches at the time, though I had attended an Episcopal and Methodist service or two. I was in my mid to late teens when I first attended an Assembly of God service of one of my friend's. It did not have the desired effect on me that Assembly members generally hope to inflict. I saw people for the first time with their arms raised up, vocalizing at random, speaking in tongues, loud and boisterous music - not at all what I was used to. It struck me as a cult. (And I still believe it is.) Over the years, I have had the misfortune to attend a few more services at fundamental churches and I still don't have an opinion that differs any more than my original evaluation.
At any rate, when I was around 20 years old, I decided to investigate Catholicism seriously. I had floundered around with my own religion my whole life, so I wanted to give the Catholic Church an honest evaluation. My friend Dan (a devout Catholic to this day), and I began going to church together - usually on Saturday evening as we both liked to sleep in on Sunday morning. I spent at least a year attending mass regularly. However what I came to realize about the Catholic Church was that it stood for so many things that I did not. And the omnipresent drone-like chanting of the service began to seem like a cult to me as well. I didn't get much out of the sermons - it was more like preaching to an enemy than instilling me with confidence. I found a great deal of hypocrisy within the Catholic Church and I, myself began to feel hypocritical attending as I no longer believed in their ways. So I stopped attending and broke my bond with Catholicism forever.
Though my Catholic bond was broken, I still considered myself to be a religious being. After I got married in 1996, my ex-wife and I spoke of how we thought it was important for our children to have a rudimentary understanding of Christianity. So before they were even born, we began looking for a local church in Ashtabula, Ohio. (By this time we had moved from Virginia.) We decide to become members of the Second Congregational United Church of Christ in Ashtabula. this was a church that my ex had attended as a child (she was also Catholic by baptism but her mother's second husband was the son of this church's minister.)
So we began attending and at first, thought we had found a home. The services were tame and more traditional. The people were older, but friendly and desperately sought younger members. The minister was fairly inspiring with some of his sermons. He actually had opened a session of Congress while we were attending that church. (Something that even then, I was totally against because of the mix of church and state thing.)
However, as time went by, we began to notice things. The friendly parishioners were actually fairly petty, full of gossip, and in some cases they were a little back-stabbing. All in all - they weren't bad people, but it makes one realize that a little smoke and mirrors goes a long way. Our minister was the CEO of a local company during the weekdays. In his travels, it turns out he would engage in a practice called "churning." This refers to booking two non-refundable tickets, back-to-back and only using the outbound portion of each in order to receive a bigger discount. This practice was and still is "illegal" in the travel industry and airlines were handing out debit memos left and right to travel agencies when they found this practice in use. The reverend's wife was bragging one day about the fact that he was engaging in this practice. My ex and I both explained that it's a bogus practice and was actually one of the contributing financial factors that got me laid-off from my corporate travel agency job in 1999. She of course realized she had put her foot in her mouth and immediately tried to back-pedal, but she never really warmed up to us after that.
So once again, I found hypocrisy in organized religion. Now, you could argue it's human nature, but for an organization that claims to be aspiring to "God's greatness", it's really just hypocritical. I lost interest in that church soon after and my ex followed my lead after awhile.
In the years that followed, I began really researching religion. Religion of all kinds - seeking some kind of spiritual truth. But all I have found is that just about every religion has a dark side. And the big three (Christianity, Judaism, and Islam), have perhaps the darkest histories of all. People have been robbed, enslaved, prostituted, sacrificed, raped, murdered, tortured, imprisoned, ridiculed, and excommunicated all for simply questioning religion and in some cases, just for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
War almost always has religion at its roots. Even if it's a social or ethnic war, there is generally always a religious dogma driving it.
I have found that religion is guilty of thousands of years of scientific retardation. The very progress forward of mankind has been inexcusably altered by these ancient superstitions. The Bible or the Koran hold about as much validity as Greek Mythology or Egyptian Sun God worship. Yes, some common sense life lessons may be present, but only at the expense of swallowing some gigantic lies - fables with no scientific evidence whatsoever.
Faith is fine when it has something substantial behind it - faith in friends or family. But blind faith in things that cannot be proven to exist is just, plain irresponsible.
The reason I am Agnostic is because I can't prove nor disprove the existence of anything beyond this, four dimensional universe. I don't believe in God per se - at least not the God or Gods of any human-born tale.
Mathematics has defined eleven dimensions of existence. Is it possible that we might one day find answers to the question of some kind of intelligent force, greater than us, that controls this universe and every other? Sure. It's possible. But not definite.
In order to achieve Agnosticism, I've had to grasp hold of and accept the fact that my death may truly be just that - death. I can accept that possibility. Like everyone else, I don't like that possibility, but I accept it nonetheless. Is it possible that there are other planes of existence I might transcend? I suppose so. But I can't define it anymore that you or anyone else on this planet. It's a possibility - not a fact. So when I hear this religion or that religion claiming to KNOW the mysteries of the universe, I can't take them seriously. Because a book says so without any relevant proof is not proof.
Einstein theorized that energy (which we are all made up of), cannot die - it simply transforms. That may be, but there's no evidence to suggest that intelligence goes with it. However, there's no evidence to say it doesn't. We will simply have to die to find out. Or perhaps one day, science will figure it out - if religion doesn't continue to hamper it.
What's truly important to humanity right now is not dwelling on the afterlife. That will come - we all die. We need to focus on the here and now so that there is a tomorrow.
Cheers.

Am I American???

I have found that a fundamental question keeps popping up this election season. Who is the REAL American? It's no secret that our presidential elections seem to be getting more bitter as the years go by and it seems that an inner struggle is the culprit. That struggle is between the 'right' and 'left' of course, but lately the 'right' (and believe me, I use that term loosely), has been labeling U.S. citizens as American or Un-American.


And I'm really a little tired of it.


Members of the Republican Party have embarked on a domestic smear campaign that tries to paint ANYONE who doesn't have their own interests at heart, as Un-American.


Some of those interests include: Undeniable belief in God - Christian God actually; homosexuals are societal deviants that are just confused about their own sexuality and indulge in their confusion rather than making attempts to correct their behavior to suit Biblical roles (aka - an abomination!); not believing in birth control protection for young adults - in favor of abstinence (yeah, which as we all know works sooooo well, right?); abhorring stem cell research to the detriment of mankind; abolishing a woman's right to choose - insisting that a "soul" resides in a two-celled organism (without ANY evidence of course that a soul actually exists); affordable health care for citizens is unacceptable; following leaders BLINDLY - no matter how stupid they may actually be; (and one of my personal favorites) America is a "Christian" nation - if you don't like it - leave.

All of these point are ridiculous. But a note on the last one - the founding fathers were Christian by Baptism and to some extent - practice, however they had aggressive views on the role of the Church in civil government. They were vehemently opposed to it. Which is why there is no consideration within the Constitution that defines the U.S. as anything other than a free and democratic country. In fact, the fabric of the Constitution prohibits the integration of religion and civil affairs. But it does prohibit the suppression of belief outside the fabric of government. So it gives people the right to believe whatever fantastical machinations they wish, but those beliefs cannot be present in affairs of the state. They were very clear on this matter.

At any rate, I am sick and tired of this move to define people with liberal viewpoints as Un-American. Liberal viewpoints have helped to make this country progressive and prosperous. Left to conservative thought, some of our greatest accomplishments may have never occurred. True innovation can only be achieved by people with open minds. Minds closed to technological advances such as stem cell research for example, retard our ability to progress as a species.
Liberal thought is more conducive to the "live and let live" mentality that should be emphasized in a free society. Conservative thought seeks to control people's actions often based on ancient dogma and/or greed. In addition, it tends to slow down forward progress - progress than can eradicate disease; quell hatred, violence, and war; slow world hunger; repair the environment; further our knowledge of the universe; or simply better our collective living conditions.
Above all, it's highly insulting to me that I be considered less American for my liberal thought than these purveyors of fear. Conservative thought revolves around fear. Fear of God, fear of terrorists, fear of homosexuals, fear of the diminished 'sanctity' of marriage, fear of big government, fear of taxes, fear of reasonable health care, fear of FRENCH FRIES and most of all - fear of those who don't do everything they say. Yet they scoff at the things we should be fearful of - global warming, disease, hunger, war, hatred, unchecked capitalism, corporate greed, spending deficits in the trillions, owing money to other countries, softening relationships with our allies.
In my humble opinion, it is far more un-American to label those with liberal thought or simply those that might question their conservative motives, as un-American.
Our founding fathers deliberately set up our system of government to insure that we are able to question our leaders. Our leaders are representatives of US - not the other way around. They must be able to provide us with answers when we question their motivation. The last 8 years has stripped that fundamental right away. And it must stop NOW - before it gets worse - and we're living an Orwellian existence.
Cheers.

Sarah Palin should take up acting

There is a saying ... "if you can't find something nice to say about someone, don't say anything at all." Well, I've said some ... horrible things about Sarah Palin lately. I don't apologize. But - I'm excited to say that I can say that I think she did a decent job on SNL last Saturday night. Frankly, she did a better job than Alec Baldwin who obviously hadn't rehearsed a thing and went in there and read directly from a teleprompter.
Perhaps, rather than political office, she should focus on a career in acting. Or even the media! Fox News, I'm sure would be happy to hire her. I can see it now - "The Maverick Report with Sarah Palin." And the best part about that - if she's on Fox News, I'll never have to hear her! It'd be a phenomenal career move for an ultra-right wing, religious-nut, maverick like Sarah P.
She could do interviews with intense world leaders like Vlad Putin, where she has common ground - (you know she can see Russia from her front porch right?)
So, in the end, unlike John McCain, when they lose this election, she will have a back-up. And I endorse that back-up of my own free accord.
There - I said something nice about her.
Cheers!

Last night - I had to yell at my mother

Last night, I had to yell at my own mother. I was talking to my dad in the ultra-conservative Shenandoah Valley of Virginia and he tells me that my mother is refusing to vote in this year's presidential election. So he puts her on the phone, and though I was losing my voice as a result of this flu/head cold I've had for almost two weeks now, I proceeded to urgently explain the need for her to vote. It seems that though she doesn't believe in McCain, she is unsure about Obama for president. She actually brought up a fear that he'd be assassinated in the first 6 months. She said, "you don't know - you didn't live through Kennedy's assassination - that was a horrible experience." I then explained that EVERY president runs that risk and security measures are far better today than they were in 1963. I continued to reason that if it were that easy, one of these dumb rednecks would've offed Bill Clinton by now - they STILL blame him for everything under the sun.
The thing that concerns me about this, "I'd never vote for McCain, but I don't know about Obama, so I'm not voting" phenomena is that I only ever hear this from non-Republicans. So essentially what this means is that the Republicans are gonna show up and vote - no problem, but what of these McCain-haters that won't show up and vote against him?! It concerns me because this could be a much closer race than it appears. And all the 'Pubs need is to have the election close enough so that they can implement the deceptive election-rigging program they've used for the last 8 years. And the election goes to the bitter, old guy who gave up his scruples to be the president ... and Tits McPalin - the void - who will probably take over in the near future after he drops dead.
If anyone reading this knows one of these McCain-hating, non-voters - please ... I beg of you - encourage them to vote!

Elitism and the presidency

I don't know exactly when it became fashionable for right-leaning politicians to promote the idea of elitism as a bad thing, but let's examine this oddity.

"Elite" - (noun) (often used with a plural verb) the choice or best of anything considered collectively, as of a group or class of persons.

I (and most everyone on the planet), have been raised to think of the word elite as meaning "the best." When one chooses a doctor, are they not looking for the best they can find? When one sees a winning sports team, are they not considered to be the most elite, or best in the sport? When we think of our military, do we not classify Green Berets, Navy Seals, Blue Angels, etc. as elite?
Why? Because they are considered to be the best.
So then, for the life of me, I cannot fathom the notion that for the office of President of the United States, we would want ANYTHING LESS than an elite individual in the Oval Office!
Elitism is NOT an "I think I'm better than you" thing. Elitism is the mindset of the truly intelligent and reasonable. You should absolutely expect nothing less than an elitist president! The person sitting in the executive chair of our nation should be the brightest apple of the bunch. The average, "simple-folk" American may lament the "folksiness" of a "W" or a Palin, but look - these people were obviously denied oxygen to their brains at some point during infancy.
At no point have I ever chosen a doctor because he or she seems like one of the common people, or because he likes country music, or because he's a good Christian. I choose a doctor because he/she exhibits intelligence! And I can see that. It may take an office visit or two to judge that intelligence, but that's why, for presidential elections, we have about two years to judge before we pull the voting levers.
Just a thought.
Cheers!