culture – Page 4 – linsenbardt.net

January 3, 2007

Wal-Mart…saving the world again…

Who’d have thought it? As some of you may have noticed when buying light bulbs at Wal-Mart recently, they’re starting to make a big push to sell more compact fluorescent bulbs (linked from a New York Times article…you may need to log in…). From the article:

“A compact fluorescent has clear advantages over the widely used incandescent light — it uses 75 percent less electricity, lasts 10 times longer, produces 450 pounds fewer greenhouse gases from power plants and saves consumers $30 over the life of each bulb. But it is eight times as expensive as a traditional bulb, gives off a harsher light and has a peculiar appearance.

“As a result, the bulbs have languished on store shelves for a quarter century; only 6 percent of households use the bulbs today.

“Which is what makes Wal-Mart’s goal so wildly ambitious. If it succeeds in selling 100 million compact fluorescent bulbs a year by 2008, total sales of the bulbs in the United States would increase by 50 percent, saving Americans $3 billion in electricity costs and avoiding the need to build additional power plants for the equivalent of 450,000 new homes.”

Now that Brooke and I have moved to a new apartment, and since AmerenUE is trying to hike electricity rates in Missouri, we’re going to try using compact fluorescent bulbs wherever we can. We got a set of 10 from Sam’s Club a few months ago for $15 (give or take…) and, personally, that seems like a pretty reasonable price to me. That, and I don’t really see much of a difference in the light emitted from them.

Anyway, if you’ve never used the bulbs before, you ought to give them a try. While I generally dislike Wal-Mart, they are certainly a “force of nature” when it comes to retail, so hopefully this push of theirs will result in more people using the bulbs and maybe make some kind of difference in global warming. As the article goes on to discuss, Wal-Mart basically told their suppliers “we’re going ahead with this, so come along or be left behind”…a few of those companies were very much against changing their manufacturing to make more of these “more expensive” bulbs. Maybe if we all start buying these bulbs, such manufacturers will get the idea, eh (cue light bulb going off above their respective heads)?

December 6, 2006

Who exactly is “rich?”

So, a study was released today from the U.N. and mentioned on plenty of different news sites, but the Bloomberg article brought something a little more interesting to my attention. Essentially, the study says that the richest 1% of the world’s adult population comprise 40% of all global wealth. I mean, that alone is pretty nuts, but further on in the article, they get a bit more specific…

Apparently, if you have $61,000 in assets, you’re in the top 10%. That’s not $61,000/yr…that’s assets…so if you own a house, chances are that you’re in the top 10% of all global wealth. These figures come from the fact that the average adult wealth in the U.S. is $144,000, while in places like India, it’s $1000.

Now, my man, Ben, made a similar point on his blog a few days ago, and I’ll reiterate: what exactly does this mean? I mean, isn’t it rather depressing that owning a house means you’re richer than 90% of the world’s population? Billions of people? Can anything be done, or will the rich keep getting richer and the poor continue to get poorer?

I guess we should all just keep stuff like this in mind as we head through the Christmas season… As you think about financial gifts you give to the needy, realize just how good you have it compared with 5.4 billion other people…

December 6, 2006

Who exactly is "rich?"

November 22, 2006

Skip the turkey, have a dinosaur!

For those of us that figured all the true nut-jobs are found in Kansas, Oklahoma, Arkansas and, yes, even Missouri…let’s not forget Kentucky!

According to this blurb at Slashdot, there’s a new museum opening next year in Kentucky, close to the Ohio border. It’s going to be devoted to Creationism. The article at The Guardian describing the “venture” states:

The Creation Museum – motto: “Prepare to Believe!” – will be the first institution in the world whose contents, with the exception of a few turtles swimming in an artificial pond, are entirely fake.

And perhaps more amusing:

As you stand in the museum’s lobby – the only part of the building approaching completion – you are surrounded by life-size dinosaur models, some moving and occasionally grunting as they chew the cud.Beside the turtle pool, two animatronic, brown-complexioned children, demurely dressed in Hiawatha-like buckskin, gravely flutter with movement. Behind them lurk two small Tyrannosaurus Rexes. This scene is meant to date from before the Fall of Man and, apparently, dinosaurs.

The museum has a web site, of course…feel free to browse…they have a lovely walk-through of the proposed plans… The thing will cost $25 million, and all but $3 million has been donated. (personally, I think I could find plenty of other things to do with $25 million, like, oh, feed all the poor people in New York City for the next decade?) Apparently, the museum gift shop is done up like a medieval castle…’cause knights used to fight dinosaurs (read: dragons) all the time!

These shenanigans remind me of a show I watched at Brooke’s parent’s house a few weeks ago…I was flipping through the TV channels on a Saturday morning and ran across a show discounting evolution on one of the religious channels…using “real scientists”! Of particular note, one of the historians they had on the show was recounting the story of Beowulf, referring specifically to the description of the monster in the story. This shrub said that the existence of a dinosaur in Beowulf was proof that dinosaurs and humans existed at the same time, thus the Bible must be correct. So now, not only should the Bible be sacred, but so should Beowulf and accounts of sea merchants sighting monsters in the oceans…and how knights of the Middle Ages fought dinosaurs daily…I mean…dragons… (which the historian also referred to…this is a trend, apparently).

So, this Thanksgiving, you should go find a dinosaur and eat it instead of a turkey… Turkeys have too much tryptophan (the amino acid that makes you sleepy after Thanksgiving dinner) and you certainly get more meat out of a Velociraptor…

November 7, 2006

I Voted

So yeah, I got up bright and early and hit the polls at 7:20 am… (bet you’re surprised, eh Mom? Happy Birthday, by the way… ;-)) Overall, the experience was rather positive… In years past, I’ve always just voted absentee rather than visit polls in Kirksville, so this is actually the first time I’ve ever voted on election day.

Regardless, I had the option of using the electronic, touch-screen device, or I could have used the more traditional “scan tron” paper ballots… There were more people using the touch-screens, but still a good number using paper ballots. The touch-screen machines were quite easy to use and also included a roll of paper to print your votes, as well as store them within the machine. I’ve been reading through various articles about how easy it is to have an election stolen (great article, but a long read…) with these electronic voting machines, since many of them (the Diebold AccuVote TSX in particular…) have no sort of secondary printer to, in effect, “back up your vote.” In case of a recount, my vote can still be compared between the electronic copy and the paper copy that was printed and stored within the machine… So yeah, I felt much more comfortable about the whole experience after using that machine…

Note: If you want to watch the HBO documentary “Hacking Democracy,” regarding Diebold’s shenanigans, you can watch it on Google Video (for free)…it’s about 1.5 hrs long, but worth it if you don’t want to watch election coverage tonight…

…however, I did have one complaint, and that was with the actual voting using the machine. In years past, when I’ve done my absentee, I could always not vote on a particular issue or judge I knew nothing about… Unfortunately, each circuit judge on the ballot (and there were many…) had a “yes” or “no” option, not an “abstain”… Perhaps you could have just hit “Next” and skip over them that way…I dunno…and I didn’t try… I figure all those judges are doing alright, so whatever… 😛

For those that voted, what “methods” of voting did you have? Were there voting machines with rolls of paper included, or were the completely electronic with no paper “backup?” Were there lots of people still using paper ballots?

Regardless, I participated in the process of government today…

Tonight’s returns should be pretty interesting….

October 25, 2006

Submitting Sheep vs Doubting Sheep

So, I listened to an On Point podcast from NPR, where Tom Ashbrook was interviewing Andrew Sullivan, author of “The Conservative Soul.” Sullivan, an Englishman, came over to the US years ago and supported Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan-era Conservativism, not the form that has been in politics more recently (i.e. small government, less control over the people vs big government, big spending, more control over liberties). The crazy thing is that he said that Bill Clinton was actually more of a conservative than the people in power now (i.e. balanced budget, smaller government). More specifically, something Sullivan said struck me as interesting:

“The capacity to doubt yourself, to question yourself, is a critical element of Western liberty. My view is that it’s also a critical part of faith. If you’ve never doubted something, you’ve never really believed it. You’ve just submitted to it. You haven’t allowed yourself to question something, and faith for me is a journey between doubt and faith. It’s a dialogue within yourself and with others as to what the truth is. It isn’t this acceptance of the truth and then the imposition of it on the world, and the claim that God justifies everything.”

Most key to that quotation is: “If you’ve never doubted something, you’ve never really believed it. You’ve just submitted to it.” I think this is a really important point that isn’t made very often, or that many people don’t connect with. You can’t simply believe something because you were told to. You can’t simply listen to Pat Robertson and James Dobson and believe that they’re infallible (even though they both think that they are). That goes for both sides of the political spectrum.

I guess I’m just thinking that, in today’s day and age, we tend to go along with things without questioning them. Without questioning ourselves. I think even some of us believe that we must be unquestioning of faith in God (or any other religious belief), in believing that His words are infallible.

But we forget that doubt and faith are completely intertwined. I think Sullivan made a very good, and interesting, point in putting it the way he did. We must always question our beliefs, whether in faith or politics. We must not abide with listening to campaign ads without looking at the evidence ourselves. We must not think that just because my church endorses a political ideology or policy, it’s correct. We must have doubt before we can believe.

There’s a very big difference between being a simple follower, and being an active believer.

October 18, 2006

Robbed of childhood…

CNN is carrying a story where an elementary school near Boston has banned “tag” and other “unsupervised chase games,” afraid that students will get hurt and their parents will sue the school. From the article:

“I think that it’s unfortunate that kids’ lives are micromanaged and there are social skills they’ll never develop on their own,” said Debbie Laferriere, who has two children at Willett, about 40 miles south of Boston. “Playing tag is just part of being a kid.”

Another Willett parent, Celeste D’Elia, said her son feels safer because of the rule. “I’ve witnessed enough near collisions,” she said.

It’s kinda sad, methinks, how this seems to be happening across the country. I’ve heard mention of teachers who stopped using red pens to mark mistakes in homework because “it’s too degrading” to the student. Is there research somewhere where people have looked at people my age who grew up with red pens and dodgeball? Is there a significant percentage of us that have become violent psychotics because of red pens and “unsupervised chase games?”

I guess I’m saying that I hope that, when I’m a parent, I’m not that protective of my kids. If I am, I’m afraid that they’ll never learn anything about life and won’t be able to fend for themselves…they won’t be able to leave the house because of fear that they’ll bump into someone on the street, or someone will criticize their work.

On the other hand, I tend to be relatively protective in general…guess I’ll have to work on that…

October 15, 2006

Just a thought…

Pumpkin

As I was watching Brooke brutally attack and disembowel a pumpkin yesterday for our jack o’ lantern, I had a thought: can one be a “meat-itarian” (or carnitarian)? As in, one who only eats meat and no plant products. …’cause, logically speaking, if you’re against the eating of defenseless-creatures, aren’t pumpkins and carrots more defenseless than cows and bears? I mean, cows and chickens can run away and fight back…not effectively, but they can do so more than, say, a potato. On the other hand, potatoes and carrots are able to hide underground from predators and try to use root systems to chain themselves to the ground, but that’s even less effective than a deer trying to evade a hunter.

So yeah, I think it makes more sense to be a meat-itarian than a vegetarian…that, and meat tastes better, besides… Just think of the horrible scene played out in my kitchen when Brooke sacrificed an unknowing pumpking and you’ll understand.

Just a thought…

October 10, 2006

Let’s get this straight…

So, I noticed today on Facebook that there are a few groups with titles like: “Missourians Against Human Cloning (Vote NO on Amendment 2)” and “Say “No” to the Missouri Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative.” For those that don’t know, here’s the actual wording from the Amendment regarding cloning:

2(1) No person may clone or attempt to clone a human being.

38(d).6.(2) ‘Clone or attempt to clone a human being’ means to implant in a uterus or attempt to implant in a uterus anything other than the product of fertilization of an egg of a human female by a sperm of a human male for the purpose of initiating a pregnancy that could result in the creation of a human fetus, or the birth of a human being.

For some reason beyond my comprehension, there are actually people in the state that somehow thinks this provides a constitutional means of protecting human cloning. No, really…you read it correctly…it completely abolishes the idea of human cloning. Why? Because in order for you to clone a person, you need to implant the embryo into a uterus for development. Does that also disallow somatic transfer (i.e. transfer of DNA from one cell to another). Yes. Because you have to implant it in a uterus. You cannot “grow” a human (or any other mammal) outside of a uterus.

So, if someone could please explain to me how people are seeing this as “constitutional protection” for human cloning, I’d be very happy to hear it…’cause it makes no sense to me. There are over 900 members in these two groups on Facebook, and it’s beyond me as to why this is so confusing. And they keep re-quoting the wording from the Amendment…like that’s some kind of defense. They only re-quote it because they don’t understand what it says and hope you won’t either.

One of the other arguments against it is that, with passing Amendment 2, you’ll target “underpriviledged women” so that they can sell their eggs for research purposes. Hmmm…let’s see…is that mentioned and outlawed?

2(4) No person may, for valuable consideration, purchase or sell human blastocysts or eggs for stem cell research or stem cell therapies and cures.

Yes, yes it’s outlawed! Oh, and even the following:

2(2) No human blastocyst may be produced by fertilization solely for the purpose of stem cell research.

So, let’s review: Missouri Constitutional Amendment 2 strictly outlaws cloning. Amendment 2 does not allow cloning. If you say that Amendment 2 allows human cloning, or provides a market for the sale of human embryos, you are lying.

It’s that simple.

Here’s more information on all the ballot measures we’ll be faced with on November 7th.