Monday, April 16, 2007
Flying Spaghetti Monster
I did not write this, I copied it from a digg user sometime back because I liked it. Unfortunately I don't remember the user so I can't give proper credit but at least I can be clear that these are not my words.
The problem is that American fundamentalists do not understand what it's like to have alternate religions. Their mind can only grasp around two concepts:
1) Jesus is a literal son of God, and believing in him brings you salvation.
2) Non-belief in God will make you burn in hell.
Here are some concepts they have no understanding of, because the very idea of possessing them feels so incredible foreign:
1) Judaism
2) Hinduism
3) Buddhism
4) Taoism
5) Islam
6) Sikhism
7) Spiritism
...and many others.
Believe it or not, there is an actual reason for this. You see, American fundamentalists are born, raised, live out their adult lives, and die right in the center of some of the most homogeneous geographic locations in the entire world. In their daily lives, the only thing they ever deal with are people who believe EXACTLY what they believe in, and then occasionally hear about some pesky Anti-Jesus-ites stir trouble. Sometimes they hear stories of one of their own neighbors venturing outside their communes into the "real world" (usually a larger American city, rarely a foreign country) and hear stories of people who don't base their whole lives and the understanding of the world they live in around the concept of pleasing Jesus, and they are downright distraught and frightened by this concept.
This, dear friends, is exactly why the concept of the "Flying Spaghetti Monster" was created. This is something that is incredibly important as a teaching tool, and I believe that the concept of the "Flying Spaghetti Monster" should seriously be taught in all public schools from an early age. The point of it is: imagine a "religious" concept so ludicrous and contrary to what you are willing to accept, and pretend that people actually believe in it. Now, if you want to enact any kind of religion-based public policy, imagine how it applies to the those who believe in the "Flying Spaghetti Monster" as strongly as they believe in whatever it is they believe in (Jesus, for example).
If you want to teach a Christian creation mythology in science, you must also teach the creation mythology of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Same with giving monetary funds to Christian organizations, funds that must also be given to followers of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Basically, EVERYTHING that any government official ever proposes in relation to ANY religion must pass the Flying Spaghetti Monster test. If you are not willing to grant the real possibility that the Flying Spaghetti Monster must be included in any and all of your proposals for public policy, then your proposals are inherently flawed and must be abandoned.
If you read up the history of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and it's invocation in public discourse, it becomes immediately obvious that American fundamentalists simply do not understand what the point of it is, and dismiss it outright as ridiculous. It is FAR from ridiculous. It is FAR from being a joke. In my opinion, it is one of the most important, illustrative examples of logical, political, and religious thinking that has ever been thought up, and more people need to become aware of it (and be touched by His noodly appendage).
The problem is that American fundamentalists do not understand what it's like to have alternate religions. Their mind can only grasp around two concepts:
1) Jesus is a literal son of God, and believing in him brings you salvation.
2) Non-belief in God will make you burn in hell.
Here are some concepts they have no understanding of, because the very idea of possessing them feels so incredible foreign:
1) Judaism
2) Hinduism
3) Buddhism
4) Taoism
5) Islam
6) Sikhism
7) Spiritism
...and many others.
Believe it or not, there is an actual reason for this. You see, American fundamentalists are born, raised, live out their adult lives, and die right in the center of some of the most homogeneous geographic locations in the entire world. In their daily lives, the only thing they ever deal with are people who believe EXACTLY what they believe in, and then occasionally hear about some pesky Anti-Jesus-ites stir trouble. Sometimes they hear stories of one of their own neighbors venturing outside their communes into the "real world" (usually a larger American city, rarely a foreign country) and hear stories of people who don't base their whole lives and the understanding of the world they live in around the concept of pleasing Jesus, and they are downright distraught and frightened by this concept.
This, dear friends, is exactly why the concept of the "Flying Spaghetti Monster" was created. This is something that is incredibly important as a teaching tool, and I believe that the concept of the "Flying Spaghetti Monster" should seriously be taught in all public schools from an early age. The point of it is: imagine a "religious" concept so ludicrous and contrary to what you are willing to accept, and pretend that people actually believe in it. Now, if you want to enact any kind of religion-based public policy, imagine how it applies to the those who believe in the "Flying Spaghetti Monster" as strongly as they believe in whatever it is they believe in (Jesus, for example).
If you want to teach a Christian creation mythology in science, you must also teach the creation mythology of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Same with giving monetary funds to Christian organizations, funds that must also be given to followers of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Basically, EVERYTHING that any government official ever proposes in relation to ANY religion must pass the Flying Spaghetti Monster test. If you are not willing to grant the real possibility that the Flying Spaghetti Monster must be included in any and all of your proposals for public policy, then your proposals are inherently flawed and must be abandoned.
If you read up the history of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and it's invocation in public discourse, it becomes immediately obvious that American fundamentalists simply do not understand what the point of it is, and dismiss it outright as ridiculous. It is FAR from ridiculous. It is FAR from being a joke. In my opinion, it is one of the most important, illustrative examples of logical, political, and religious thinking that has ever been thought up, and more people need to become aware of it (and be touched by His noodly appendage).
Labels: flying spaghetti monster religion church state
Thursday, April 05, 2007
Quick Commentary on Dieting and Exercise
Diets in themselves are not necessarily bad. People just need to take them for what they are, a way to lose weight rather quickly. However, if you don't have a plan in place to transition from the diet into a healthy lifestyle of course you'll gain the weight back. This isn't because the diet didn't work, it's because you got off the diet and went back to doing the same thing you did to gain all the weight in the first place.
Diet = short term quick weight loss solution, it's not a sustainable way of eating
btw...want real results?
1) Go on a high protein diet (.9g protein/lbs of body weight)
2) Lift weights...FREE WEIGHTS...no machines
- Squats, Deadlifts, Bench; 1 per week; 3 sets and 5 reps
- Squats, Rows and Military Presses; 1 per week; 3 set and 5 reps
- Do not add weight until you have good form
- Once you have good form, increase weight each time while making sure you can still complete your 3x5 with good form
3) 30 minutes of cardio 3 times a week (treadmill is best as it uses your overweight status to your advantage)
4) Drink lots of water
5) Get 8 hours of sleep
You'll feel like a changed human in 3 months, I guarantee it!
You obviously are unlikely to stay on the above program longterm so plan on transitioning to a more normal lifestyle at some point. You can maintain your new body with much less work but be warned, if you just stop lifting, stop cardio and eat junk food you're old body will be back in a flash!!!
Diet = short term quick weight loss solution, it's not a sustainable way of eating
btw...want real results?
1) Go on a high protein diet (.9g protein/lbs of body weight)
2) Lift weights...FREE WEIGHTS...no machines
- Squats, Deadlifts, Bench; 1 per week; 3 sets and 5 reps
- Squats, Rows and Military Presses; 1 per week; 3 set and 5 reps
- Do not add weight until you have good form
- Once you have good form, increase weight each time while making sure you can still complete your 3x5 with good form
3) 30 minutes of cardio 3 times a week (treadmill is best as it uses your overweight status to your advantage)
4) Drink lots of water
5) Get 8 hours of sleep
You'll feel like a changed human in 3 months, I guarantee it!
You obviously are unlikely to stay on the above program longterm so plan on transitioning to a more normal lifestyle at some point. You can maintain your new body with much less work but be warned, if you just stop lifting, stop cardio and eat junk food you're old body will be back in a flash!!!
Thursday, January 04, 2007
NHL: The Right Direction?
Right Direction
- Enforcing rules so the game is dominated by the skill players not the clutch and grabbers.
- Regular season shootout, I hate to see a game won that way but the fact remains it's better than a tie!
- I like all the new rules except maybe the goalie handling the puck but even then I'm not that bothered by it.
Needs Work
- DO NOT take away physical play, enforce rules, specifically stick infractions but do not take away physicality!! I can't understate this enough, I want to see hits, hits and more hits. They are just as entertaining as a good goal and fans love it.
- I like the intention of the scheduling to build rivalries but 8 times a season is just too much. Scale it back to 5 so someone wins the series and use the extra 12 games to schedule non-conference opponents so fans can enjoy some variety and be able to see all the superstars.
- Marketing needs to get much better. I liked the "Just reminding you the seasons started" commercials but I only saw those commercials WHILE I was watching a game. I appreciate you preaching to the choir but that will not help the game grow. I add one caveat though, DO NOT tweak the on ice product just to attract casual fans, that's what marketing is supposed to handle!
- Be very mindful of diving and punish those who do it with a heavy hand. I'd really like to see tape reviewed (after game) and players found diving be given fines and suspensions. This must be stopped now or it could really damage the league!
Thanks for your time and as always, this isn't coming from a Canadian, a North-Easterner or even someone accustomed to snow. I'm a proud desert rat down here in Phoenix, AZ.
Thursday, August 17, 2006
Why would the Coyotes sign Roenick and Nolan? Do they have any direction?
Who here honestly thinks Roenick and Nolan won't play up to their $1.25 million dollar contracts? Further more, why on earth would the Yotes pay $3 and $4 million for Sykora and Samsanov? They may end up with better seasons but I doubt they'll have 3x or 4x the season! Given money and length of contract, I'd much rather have Roenick and Nolan than Sykora and Samsanov.
On the outside the Yotes may seem like a confused franchise but from the inside it's a different picture. They are in the process of rebuilding but rather than completely tanking it and icing a bunch of AHL players, they are trying to stay competitive. As a fan I appreciate the approach and would rather watch them have a shot at the playoffs (where anything can happen) then just play for a lottery pick. It'd be one thing if they were mortgaging their future in the process but they are not. They are building a solid farm that over the next couple of years should finally start to produce!
btw...I'd also like to point out that if Roenick and/or Nolan have comeback years, think of what they'd be worth at the trade deadline with their cheap 1 year contracts? If the Yotes don't look strong enough to make the playoffs, they can dump those two for some picks and just keep stocking the farm. It certainly seems like a worthwhile strategy to me.
Yes Jovo is overpayed based on the past couple of years and I still have no idea why they basically gave Johnson away for free but the bottom line is the Yotes do have a vision, plan, direction or whatever you'd like to call it. It's just going to take a few years before it can come to fruition, so in the meantime they are doing their best to ice a decent team for the fans. I don't think you can ask for anything more!
On the outside the Yotes may seem like a confused franchise but from the inside it's a different picture. They are in the process of rebuilding but rather than completely tanking it and icing a bunch of AHL players, they are trying to stay competitive. As a fan I appreciate the approach and would rather watch them have a shot at the playoffs (where anything can happen) then just play for a lottery pick. It'd be one thing if they were mortgaging their future in the process but they are not. They are building a solid farm that over the next couple of years should finally start to produce!
btw...I'd also like to point out that if Roenick and/or Nolan have comeback years, think of what they'd be worth at the trade deadline with their cheap 1 year contracts? If the Yotes don't look strong enough to make the playoffs, they can dump those two for some picks and just keep stocking the farm. It certainly seems like a worthwhile strategy to me.
Yes Jovo is overpayed based on the past couple of years and I still have no idea why they basically gave Johnson away for free but the bottom line is the Yotes do have a vision, plan, direction or whatever you'd like to call it. It's just going to take a few years before it can come to fruition, so in the meantime they are doing their best to ice a decent team for the fans. I don't think you can ask for anything more!
Friday, August 04, 2006
More skill, Crosby or Ovechkin? Who has the better career? Who makes a better captain NEXT year?
When it comes down to skill, who is better - Crosby or Ovechkin?
This is tough to answer since they both have very different games. Crosby is definitely the better playmaker and has the better on ice vision. Ovechkin is the better pure goal scorer and has much more physical presence. Both are absolutely dominating phenoms! Basically Crosby is a great passer and good shooter, Ovechkin is a great shooter and good passer. At this point they are a tie.
Who will grow up to be the better star player?
While Ovechkin is one of my favorite players, I'd have to give Crosby the nod here. To do what he did last year as an 18 year old is nothing short of amazing. I do expect him to be a generational player like a Gretzky or Lemieux where as Ovy will probably be like a Jagr only more physical.
Who would you rather have as the captain next year?
This one is easy, hands down it would be Ovechkin. Much better attitude at this point (not harping on Sid the Kid, he just needs to mature), strong and inspiring personality and a true passion for the game. Ovy is way ahead of Crosby in terms of the C at this point in his career!
This is tough to answer since they both have very different games. Crosby is definitely the better playmaker and has the better on ice vision. Ovechkin is the better pure goal scorer and has much more physical presence. Both are absolutely dominating phenoms! Basically Crosby is a great passer and good shooter, Ovechkin is a great shooter and good passer. At this point they are a tie.
Who will grow up to be the better star player?
While Ovechkin is one of my favorite players, I'd have to give Crosby the nod here. To do what he did last year as an 18 year old is nothing short of amazing. I do expect him to be a generational player like a Gretzky or Lemieux where as Ovy will probably be like a Jagr only more physical.
Who would you rather have as the captain next year?
This one is easy, hands down it would be Ovechkin. Much better attitude at this point (not harping on Sid the Kid, he just needs to mature), strong and inspiring personality and a true passion for the game. Ovy is way ahead of Crosby in terms of the C at this point in his career!
Fighting in the NHL
Why is Fighting allowed and encouraged in Hockey, while in other Major sports fighting is frowned upon?
"In other sports, you fight, you are done for the rest of the game. In Hockey, you get a few minutes in a box, then are allowed to return to the ice and continue your assualt, on the other player."
My Response:
Fighting has always been part of hockey. Basically the philosophy in hockey is that players police themselves. So essentially when you have one player going around taking cheap shots or acting like an a$$, they are gonna have to answer to a teams enforcer. Players like Terrel Owens, Roger Clemens and well most of the NBA don't really exist in hockey (the closest might be Sean Avery) because when you act in the manner they do, you're gonna have to back it up. It's an old school mentality that I personally appreciate. I have no respect for the prima donna stars who constantly run their mouth (regardless of the sport) or play cheap. They don't know the meaning of honor or sportsmanship!!!
Fighting is allowed but absolutely NOT encouraged. For anyone to say different would be a sure sign of ignorance which judging by some of the answers so far there is plenty of that to go around. Fighting is very much regulated. It is a part of the sport and thus has rules that govern it. When you see a fight in baseball it's an out of control bench brawl. You never see clearing of the benches in hockey. In fact if you leave the bench it's an automatic ejection and likely suspension even if you didn't throw a single punch. Hockey is mono e mono, each man stands up for his own actions, they don't hide behind the flurry of kicks and haymakers of an entire team.
As for your "few minutes in the box and then are allowed to return to the ice and continue your assault" comment, you obviously don't even watch hockey. Rarely does a player ever fight twice, %90 of the time when it's over, it's over. If you instigate again you may be rejected regardless of reason and you'll most certainly put your team down a man which could cost the game.
As for those who like to minimize the game...duh...you can do that with any sport!! Who wants to watch someone take a pointy oval shaped pigskin across a 100yds of grass each Sunday? Who wants to watch someone try to hit a leather ball with a stick over a fence? What's so entertaining about hitting a small dimpled ball with a crooked stick while wearing plad pants? If you want to make any sport sound stupid it's not a difficult task!!!
Look for those of you who don't like hockey, that is fine but please don't go around spreading ignorant views on a topic you obviously know nothing about!
Sunday, July 23, 2006
Who is the most marketable player in the NHL?
Far and away the most marketable player is Ovechkin. He's arguably the most exciting player in the NHL but the kid absolutely ooozes passion and excitement for the game of hockey!! He's got the flavor, the moxy, the swagger, whatever term you'd like to use to describe it, he's got it and he's got it in spades!!! Not to mention Ovy absolutely loves the NHL and living in America. The fact that he's so excited to be here just makes people warm up to him that much more. Honestly if you can't market that, you're an absolute fucking idiot! Ovechkin can be a household name easily, it'll be a shame if the NHL screws this up.
Second I would probably pick Crosby, simply because he's got that whole heir apparent thing going and even more impressive it looks like he's actually going to live up to it.
Crosby/Ovechkin have the potential to do for hockey what Bird/Magic did for basketball or Sampras/Agassi did for tennis. Please don't screw this up Bettman, you've got the ultimate opportunity here!!!
Second I would probably pick Crosby, simply because he's got that whole heir apparent thing going and even more impressive it looks like he's actually going to live up to it.
Crosby/Ovechkin have the potential to do for hockey what Bird/Magic did for basketball or Sampras/Agassi did for tennis. Please don't screw this up Bettman, you've got the ultimate opportunity here!!!
Sunday, April 02, 2006
Should the Phoenix Coyotes tank the season?
My first impulse was to say "yeah, go ahead and tank it" but the more I've thought about it the clearer it comes to me...no way! I've gone to a couple of games the past couple of weeks and it was clear to me how fragile hockey is here in the valley. Many people are going to games now because they are getting free tickets because the Yotes are out of the playoff race so tickets are not in demand. So many of these people are first time fans who are very impressionable. Ice a miserable team and those fans go away thinking..."man hockey sucks!". Let's not forget EVERYONE starts out a casual fan! On another note, there are plenty of die hards who are huge hockey fans who still buy tickets, still make the trek out to Glendale and cheer their heads off for the team. They deserve an all out effort regardless of where the Yotes are in the standings. I'd be really really pissed to go to a game and watch a team "tanking it"!! While I'd love to get a higher pick and obviously I wish they would've started winning a month ago, purposely throwing in the towel is just the wrong thing to do.
