tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-374918652024-03-07T13:11:06.223-05:00Thou and Thou OnlyRiches we heed not, nor man's empty praise.<br><br>
This blog belongs to the family of JunkMale, a Christian and Georgia Tech alumnus. Target demographics might include conservative Christian, healthy-eating, homeschooling, interracial families, and others who do not call this world "home." Where homemade is usually better than store-bought. For more info, click the "About" link below.Harmonyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15105846442509828835noreply@blogger.comBlogger22125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-658258724439082482010-10-10T10:10:00.001-04:002010-10-10T10:10:01.449-04:0010/10/10Seen on facebook, via one of my friends (and you can tell the sort of friends I have by this!):<br /><br /><blockquote><span id="profile_status">There are 10 types of people in the world. those who know the ultimate answer is tomorrow, and those who don't. Don't miss out!</span></blockquote><blockquote><span id="profile_status"><br /></span></blockquote><br /><br />Does anyone have any nerdy plans for 10/10/10? ;)<br /><br />*(And, yes, I'm presumably at church right now. But it just seemed poetic to schedule the post for 10:10 am, don't you think?)Harmonyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15105846442509828835noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-67387432547637263192010-07-27T11:55:00.002-04:002010-07-27T11:57:08.895-04:00Carnival of HomeschoolingThe 239th Carnival of Homeschooling is up at the Common Room. The theme is the history of homeschooling. <a href="http://heartkeepercommonroom.blogspot.com/2010/07/carnival-of-homeschooling-239.html">Go check it out!</a>Harmonyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15105846442509828835noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-40082532573096621502010-07-10T07:49:00.001-04:002010-07-10T07:49:00.096-04:00Pet PeevesThe books you order from paperbackswap are NOT free. I'm sorry to burst your frugal bubble, but unless you are sending the books via some free postal service, you are <span style="font-style: italic;">paying</span> to receive a credit. I pay on average about $2.30 for my books, which is a steal considering the books I order, but <span style="font-style: italic;">it's still not free</span>. In fact, it's so not free that it's actually cheaper to buy books from a thrift store or a library book sale than it is to get them off of paperbackswap.com.<br /><br />Don't get me wrong, I adore paperbackswap. But it causes my insides to roil with righteous indignation whenever I hear someone falsely claim that they got books "for free!' off of a website that they essentially have to pay to use.Harmonyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15105846442509828835noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-40593718443035943372010-01-28T07:31:00.000-05:002010-01-28T07:31:00.225-05:00A History of Breastfeeding, Part 2This is the second piece in a series on breastfeeding. <a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2010/01/history-of-breastfeeding-part-1.html">The first part</a> was introductory material. This part is the meat of the history. And part three, which is not written yet, tries to form conclusions. For a much more complete and well-researched history of breastfeeding in Renaissance Europe, please read <a href="http://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/pdf/hisper_breast.pdf">Historical Perspectives on Breastfeeding</a>. All page number references refer to this essay.<br /><br />In medieval Europe, just about any doctor, midwife, or priest who touches on the subject urged women to nurse their own babies. And so far as I know, it used to be the normal way of things. But by the time of the Renaissance breastfeeding - and childcare in general - went out of vogue in the upper classes.<br /><br />It's hard to say what, exactly, caused this. In my opinion, it was likely a result of the Plague of the mid 1300's, when so many were dying that parents either gave up caring whether their children lived or died, or they couldn't stand watching them die anymore. Whatever the reason, sometime in the 14th century wet nursing took off. Breastfeeding rates plummeted among the upper classes. Mothers sent their babies away for a year or two to be nursed by another woman, and the disconnect began.<br /><br />"It was not until the late 18th century that women were permitted to take in more than one child or to nurse both their own child and that of another woman." (p34) This meant that a horribly large number of babies of the upper and lower classes were not nursed by their own mother. In fact, in Paris in 1780, a police lieutenant "declared that out of the 21,000 children who were born each year in that city, only 1,000 were nursed by their mothers and another 1,000 by live-in wet nurses; all the others were sent out to the country" (p34). And without the immediate bond between mother and baby (and often a resentment on the part of the wet nurse, who had to send away her own child in order to nurse this new one), maternal affection was sorely lacking in Europe:<br /><blockquote>"It is easy to see from experience how this natural affection, in which we invest so much authority, has superficial roots. Every day, in exchange for a small profit, we tear children from their mothers' arms and make them take ours instead; we make them abandon their offspring to some emaciated wet nurse, to whom we would never give our own child, or to some goat"<br />-Michel de Montaigne, late 16th century (p34)</blockquote>And shockingly, many of these children were passed from wet nurse to wet nurse - at least 33% in 15th century Florence had two wet nurses, while 2% had <span style="font-style: italic;">five</span> (p37). The children hardly saw their parents during this time, as the ideal wet nurse lived in the country and the roads were often difficult to travel:<br /><blockquote>"From the 17th century, medical writers urged parents... to visit their children at nurse.... [R]egular parental visits and close supervision were the exception rather than the rule. ... In the late 16th century, the children of John Dee were visited by their parents only once every one or two months. Two centuries earlier Lapo Mazzei, a poor notary of Prato and father of 14 children, was certainly no exception to the rule when he wrote... of his weaned son: 'Your godson, <span style="font-style: italic;">whom I have only seen once before</span>, has come back to me from his wet nurse....'"</blockquote>Obviously, the child often faced serious emotional trauma when, upon weaning, they were uprooted from their wet nurse and brought to live in the home of strangers, their parents.<br /><br />In the rare cases where a woman did nurse her own child, society viewed her as something of a saint. "In fact, such was the 'superior' affection that women bore for the children they suckled that they often wrote about their greater devotion to them and even left them extra money in their wills" (p26).<br /><br />One of the most interesting pieces I've read while researching this topic was <a href="http://digital.library.upenn.edu/women/clinton/nurserie/nurserie.html">The Countesse of Lincolnes Nurserie</a>, written in 1622 by a lady who had sent her own children out to a wet nurse, but whose daughter-in-law had changed her mind when she nursed the grandchildren. She gives the reasons why women used wet nurses, namely "that it is troublesome; that it is noysome to ones clothes; that it makes one looke old, &c." She regrets sending her own children away, especially since she believed "the death of one or two of my little Babes came by the defalt of their nurses. Of all those which I had for eighteene children, I had but two which were throughly willing, and carefull." The Countesse reasons, using Scripture, that it is a woman's duty to nurse her own children. <a href="http://digital.library.upenn.edu/women/clinton/nurserie/nurserie.html">But read the whole thing yourself.</a><br /><br />As it happened, about a hundred years later, there was a brief time in the mid 1700s where many European women nursed their children. But it was short-lived, and there was a brief return to wet nursing before, sadly, hand feeding took over. Women had got used to having their babies at home with them (thankfully), but they no longer wanted to breastfeed. Obviously, the infant mortality rate remained high, mostly because of the horrible concoctions that were being passed off as infant food.<br /><br />The rest of the story you likely know. Pasteur, Nestlé, and the formula industry were born in this culture, and it is only now that there has been a serious surge of breastfeeding mothers. It is the first time in two hundred years that a significant percentage of western women breastfed for any real length of time, and only the second time since the wet nursing fad took hold back in the 13th century that women have nursed their own children.<br /><br />So the next time someone blames formula companies for the low breastfeeding numbers, back up for a minute and look back to the real root of the problem. Formula companies were capitalizing on an attitude towards mothering and breastfeeding that has existed for over 400 years in the West. Blaming them is missing the whole point: Western women don't like being their children's nurses, and they haven't liked it for well over 400 years. That attitude needs to change first, otherwise our efforts will only have a limited effect.<br /><br />In part three: cultural attitudes towards breastfeeding, particularly as it relates to religion.Harmonyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15105846442509828835noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-50976744585264400772010-01-25T07:52:00.001-05:002010-01-25T07:52:00.385-05:00A History of Breastfeeding, Part 1When you do a Google search for "history of breastfeeding", you get hundreds of hits that go something like this:<br /><br /><blockquote>In ancient times all women breastfed their babies because it was the only way to feed them. Then in the mid 1800's, men like Henri Nestlé began making commercial infant formula. It wasn't long before the rates of breastfeeding began to sharply decline.</blockquote><br /><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; width: 200px; height: 147px;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_avUUQxpy30o/Sy9lTQi0WrI/AAAAAAAACew/z4veXZgb8Vs/s200/0_newborn_drinking_milk.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5417660258282920626" border="0" />... and so on. While all of that is for the most part factual, it is in no way a complete history of breastfeeding. It implies that between ancient times and the mid 19th century, breastfeeding practices were largely uniform across cultures and across times, and what's more, it implies that the breastfeeding relationship between mother and baby was ideal and rosy until the advent of formula.<br /><br />Based on the few essays and historical documents I've been able to find that deal with earlier history, this could not be further from the truth. In fact, the reason formula caught on like it did was because there already existed in Western societies a shocking disconnect between mothers and babies for centuries before formula was invented.<br /><br />So let's start at the beginning. At some point in ancient history, it was certainly common for women to nurse their own children. But as early as the time of Abraham, the custom of wet nursing had apparently been invented (Gen 24:59 and Gen 35:8 refer to Rebekah's nurse). But Sarah - a very wealthy woman - nursed Isaac (Gen 21:7), and it seems likely (although finding scholarship to back this up is difficult) that the majority of women breastfed their babies. We see that Naomi was a nurse to her grandson Obed (Ruth 4:16), though it is not clear that she was a <span style="font-style: italic;">wet</span> nurse.<br /><br />While the Bible is mostly silent on the subject, Jewish tradition <a href="http://www.natural-jewish-parenting.com/01Tokayer.html">is full of advice on the "right way" to breastfeed</a>:<br /><blockquote><ul><li>The <i>Mishna </i>(<i>Ketubot </i>59b) instructs us that breastfeeding her baby is a woman’s obligation toward her husband—so much so that other household functions take lower priority during this time.</li><li>According to the <i>Shulchan Aruch </i>(<i>Yoreh Deah</i> 81:7) a child may nurse, if healthy, until four years old; a sickly or weak child, until five years old.</li><li>Most sources point towards 24 months as the accepted <i>minimum </i>length of the breastfeeding relationship. Even the most lenient of authorities points to the age when a baby has six to eight teeth. This is estimated to be between the ages of ten and sixteen months.</li><li>The <i>Talmud</i> (<i>Yerushalmi, Brochot</i> 68a) states that a Jew should be involved in Torah every hour of the day just as a baby nurses every hour of the day. Also, a baby should be allowed to nurse as often as he desires. “Even if he nurses all day long it will not harm him” (<i>Tosefta, Sotah </i>4:1).</li></ul></blockquote><br />Some Orthodox Jewish women believe it is her duty to breastfeed until the baby is 24 months old and that anything less is sinful. Two years seems to be the bare minimum that most cultures recommend. I understand that the Koran also advocates at least 24 months before weaning, and even in European cultures - which have had serious problems with breastfeeding for centuries - experts believed that when the baby had all its teeth its body was ready to be weaned. In Florence in 1415, there was even a law that if a wet nurse weaned her charge before 30 months, she was subject to public whipping (page 21 <a href="http://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/pdf/hisper_breast.pdf">here</a>).<br /><br /><img style="margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; float: right; width: 154px; height: 200px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhUICy6rYX_aSZbDZYrcmWofFshMbrvhCSS65KLF6MXI8qbjhvlazFQZzcwTjtXNy_7XycP08_TJluduaz98eflFygzRVf_zCz7akDNjWNPV6n-CNbmE7_0V3v0JC5YrgF-CgkusQ/s200/1999_76_2_bw.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5417681288336452578" border="0" />It would seem that most cultures had a pretty good grasp of the benefits of breastfeeding and its role in preventing infant deaths.* But this is not always the case. In Europe around the Renaissance, something went terribly wrong.....<br /><br />To Be Continued<br /><br />*Many cultures did seem to have a fear that colostrum was bad for the baby. Often babies were hand-fed until the mother's milk came in, a practice that surely resulted in the unnecessary deaths of many children.Harmonyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15105846442509828835noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-81777202250721655282009-01-16T09:19:00.001-05:002009-02-02T08:41:24.087-05:00Preparing for the CPSIAI'm sure most of you have heard of the Consumer Products Safety Improvement Act. If you haven't, get yourself over to the <a href="http://heartkeepercommonroom.blogspot.com/2009/01/cpsia-another-clarification-on.html?disqus_reply=5159067#comment-5159067">Common Room for all the latest</a>. It's a poorly thought out law that is already having undesired consequences. Connie says she will have to <a href="http://smockityfrocks.blogspot.com/2009/01/consumer-product-safety-improvement-act.html">stop selling her bonnets</a>, which I think is a travesty. Most sellers of homemade children's products who do not have such pure consciences have decided they will continue to sell, despite the fact that they know that after February 10th they will be commiting a felony to sell their products.<br /><br />(warning: sarcasm ahead...)<br /><br />This law applies to every single product which is commonly used by children 12 and under. The irony is that many toy manufacturers have no idea that they are even supposed to comply with this law. So, as a good citizen, I thought I would give the following industries a heads-up that they should prepare their inventory for the CPSIA:<br /><ul><li>Cardboard boxes. This dangerous toy will certainly need to be tested, for the sake of the children.</li><li>All sports products. Footballs, soccer balls, swim suits, jerseys... Since children start playing sports well under 12 years old, these now obviously need to be tested for compliance. Because we wouldn't want a 12 year old to get kicked in the mouth by cleats and get lead poisoning from them. (So they will naturally be testing the grass and astroturf where the little league games are played, right? In case a child falls down and gets a mouth full of grass, we can't be too sure that it's safe!)<br /></li><li>Bricks. Brick factory was a favorite game of Ramona Quimby, so it must still be a popular game, right?</li><li>Clothes pins. These potentially hazardous toys can be used as dolls if you draw a face on them, or they could be clipped onto fingers to create truely spooky fingernails.</li><li>Adult formal wear. Because "dress-up" is always a little girl's favorite game. And let's not forget</li><li>Make-up. Because what little girl hasn't played with her mother's make-up collection?<br /></li><li>Pots and pans and spoons. A toddler's favorite musical instrument! How can we justify not testing this group of products, which are typically made of <span style="font-style: italic;">metals</span> (and lead is, in fact, a metal), when fabric and wood are now under suspicion?</li><li>Televisions. Children now spend most of their lives in front of televisions - in fact, nearly every American child has a TV in their room. So naturally, ALL TV's now fall under this law.</li><li>Pets. This will be a tricky one, because the testing process requires destroying the object tested. But as pets are often given to children as gifts, they obviously fall under this new law. I can't wait to hear PETA's reaction to this.... But if pets get a bye because they are living creatures, then their accessories (collars, food bowls, etc) certainly cannot.<br /></li><li>Vegetables. Farmers will now have to test their crops for lead levels, I presume, as soil these days has lead levels that might exceed the maximum ppm allowed by law.</li></ul>And I have no idea how they are going to regulate sticks and rocks and grass and soil. But I forgot. Children don't play outside anymore, so they're at least safe from that potential danger.<br /><br />As you can see, the scope of this legislation is ridiculous. I only hit on the first few things that came to mind, but there are hundreds of products that a significant number of America's children use on a daily basis that could theoretically be subject to the CPSIA.<span style="font-style: italic;"></span> The problems with the CPSIA are legion, and it won't take you more than two pages of a google search for "CPSIA" to come up with at least a dozen more reasons than I've given you. <span style="font-style: italic;">This law was poorly written and is in desperate need of revision!<br /><br /></span>If you think I'm overreacting a bit, check out how LG has interpreted this law: they are <a href="http://us.lge.com/compliance/2008/november.jsp">testing their refrigerators</a>.<br /><br />And if you think that the government will never enforce it for small businesses, I would say you are naive. You need only look at how our benevolent government treats the <a href="http://www.peacechicken.com/2008/12/05/action-item-swat-raids-co-op-in-rural-ohio/">food industry</a>. What's more, we as consumers will now be faced with the prospect of buying illicit goods. Can Christians buy a banned toy in good faith? We are, after all, subject to the laws of the country we live in. And certainly, no Christian should knowingly break the law and sell items that have not been tested, right?<br /><br />Please, write your representatives and let them know you want the CPSIA revised or repealed. We want our children to be safe, but surely there is a better way to do it.<span style="font-style: italic;"><span style="font-style: italic;"></span><br /></span>Harmonyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15105846442509828835noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-52352423299573846012008-10-29T07:48:00.003-04:002008-10-29T08:00:43.350-04:00A New EpithetHenceforth, any reference to the mere man known as "Barack Obama" will be replaced with the new epithet <b>Our Great Leader Comrade Obama (hope be upon him)</b>. That way, maybe this blog will survive the coming revolution.<br /><br /><a href="http://blog.andthensome.nl/wp-content/images/2007/01/360344225_21ab62e2dd.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 450px; height: 333px;" src="http://blog.andthensome.nl/wp-content/images/2007/01/360344225_21ab62e2dd.jpg" border="0" alt="North Korean propaganda from someone else's page" /></a><br /><br />Maybe I will go back and revise any past references I have made to Our Great Leader Comrade Obama (hope be upon him). Revision of history is a key component of political revolutions. You dissenters better do the same, or you might be subject to "re-education." Failing re-education, you will be subject to elimination.JunkMalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02619673168896233941noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-33207379228785862772008-06-27T08:44:00.000-04:002008-06-27T08:44:01.506-04:00Misleading Google Search HitsI oftentimes hear people use the following phrase:<br /><blockquote>I searched for (this and that) on Google and I got 170,000 hits!</blockquote><br />The person saying this usually says this to prove his point that the search query is a relevant issue or term. As if 170,000 search results is an unnaturally large number of results.<br /><br />This can be somewhat misleading.<br /><br />Google is the biggest and best search engine on the Internet today. If you type in any group of words, you will get lots and lots of results. The words do not even have to be close to each other in the document for Google to pull it up. For example, I typed in "i ate a purple hippo" (without quotes) and got 186,000 results. I type in the search terms "turbid integument" and...um..well...that's not a great example, because those two words only yield 9,620 results. "defenestrated cow" only yields 5,780. JunkMale notes that archaic words are less likely to give massive quantities of results.<br /><br />Just because someone (who's trying to prove a point) types search words into Google and gets plenty of results does not mean that the point is somehow made more valid. By typing in words that could be related to each other in whatever remote or not-so-remote ways, you will get lots of search results. I type in the words "monsanto safe consumption" and get 249,000 results. Next, I slightly modify the words: "monsanto not safe consumption." This gives me 27,000 results. This does not necessarily mean that Monsanto crops are more safe for consumption. * For control purposes, I searched for "more suicides during summer." This gave me 2,060,000 hits.<br /><br />Google is just a search engine; it will not reveal all of life's answers, although it could help you find some of them. You have to use your <i>brain</i> when trying to prove a point with Google, not just look at the quantity of results. Are there results on the first page that are even related to your query?<br /><br />After saying all that, I do concede that if your search query has quotes around it (i.e. searching for exact phrase) and you still find many results for that exact phrase, then perhaps you are on to something. <i>Perhaps.</i><br /><br />* - <span style="font-size:75%;">I was prompted to write this post while watching the documentary "The World According to Monsanto," which is why I reference Monsanto search queries.</span>JunkMalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02619673168896233941noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-60928073642011469622008-05-14T07:00:00.000-04:002008-05-14T07:00:03.798-04:00Posts You Might Have Missed<em>(For those of you not using Internet Explorer, can you see the "Recent Posts" on the left? It wasn't working when I viewed it at home last night. Please let me know if you can't see it.)</em><br /><br />Most unfortunately, not all of you have been with us since the beginning. Here are some posts that you might have missed. Or they are posts that I thought would get more comments, but didn't. I encourage you to comment on them if you're inclined; I don't care that they are old posts.<br /><br /><ul><li><a title="Thou and Thou Only - You're Judging Me" href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2007/02/youre-judging-me.html" target="new">"You're Judging Me!"</a> - You've heard the phrase, now read the post.</li><br /><li><a title="Thou and Thou Only - Natural Selection at Work" href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2007/03/natural-selection-at-work.html" target="new2">Natural Selection at Work</a></li><br /><li><a title="Thou and Thou Only - " href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2007/03/selfish-materialist-discusses-energy.html" target="new3">The Selfish Materialist Discusses Energy Consumption</a> - A post in the same vein as my post on <a title="Thou and Thou Only - Recollections of Environmentalist Kool-Aid in Elementary School" href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2008/03/recollections-of-environmentalist-kool.html" target="newwindow">environmentalist Kool-Aid in elementary school</a> and also the follow-up post <a title="Thou and Thou Only - A Closer Look at Local Foods and Recycling" href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2008/04/closer-look-at-local-foods-and.html" target="new3">taking a closer look at local foods and recycling.</a></li><br /><li><a title="Thou and Thou Only - Can't Get Something for Nothing" href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2007/03/cant-get-something-for-nothing.html" target="new4">Can't Get Something for Nothing</a> - Another environment post. I've created an "environment" label, since there were a number of these sorts of posts.</li><br /><li><a title="Thou and Thou Only - 100 Posts, 100 Facts About Us" href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2007/03/better-late-than-never-100-posts.html" target="new5">100 Posts, 100 Facts About Us</a></li><br /><li><a title="Thou and Thou Only - Folly of Unguided Youth Interaction" href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2007/04/folly-of-unguided-youth-interaction.html" target="new6">Folly of Unguided Youth Interaction</a> - My life wouldn't be any worse if I'd skipped out on "socialization" in middle school. Here are some examples.</li></ul>JunkMalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02619673168896233941noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-36776254918317692522008-04-23T10:04:00.004-04:002008-04-23T10:15:52.960-04:00Food ShortagesFor anyone wondering why <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/07/opinion/07krugman.html?hp">food prices are on the rise</a>:<br /><ul><li>bad harvest in Australia due to a bad drought</li><li>more third world (or former third world) residents are eating meat - 500 calories of grain needed to produce 100 calories of meat</li><li>agriculture is dependent on oil (fertilizer, machinery, transportation, etc), and the price of oil is on the rise</li><li>biofuels are eating up our corn and sugar supplies worldwide</li></ul>Corn and <a href="http://cbs5.com/wrapper_consumer/seenon/rice.shortage.rationing.2.705309.html">rice</a> are the worst problems in the US thus far. Corn because of biofuels and animal feed, and rice because... well, I'm not quite sure, but it's probably a trickle-down effect due to the fact that many of the nations that are facing the most severe crunches rely on rice as a primary food source.<br /><br />So. Be glad we're not in a country that relies on food imports, seriously consider growing your own food (especially crops that will store, like beans and grains), and try to find more room in that food budget!Harmonyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15105846442509828835noreply@blogger.com10tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-1898394882780183122008-04-07T10:16:00.001-04:002008-04-07T15:09:07.437-04:00The New Face of SurvivalismThe New York Times writes that <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/06/fashion/06survival.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2&ref=style" target="newwindow">survivalism is not just for paranoid loner anarchists anymore</a>. It seems that survivalism is seeing a rise in popularity among "normal" suburbanites and/or non-extremists.<br /><br />Here's the first paragraph of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivalism" target="newwindow2">survivalism entry in Wikipedia</a>:<br /><blockquote>Survivalism is a commonly used (and often mis-used) term for the preparedness strategy and subculture of individuals or groups anticipating and making preparations for future possible disruptions in local, regional or worldwide social or political order. Survivalists often prepare for this anticipated disruption by learning skills (e.g., emergency medical training), stockpiling food and water, preparing for self-defense and self-sufficiency, and/or building structures that will help them to survive or "disappear" (e.g., a survival retreat or underground shelter).</blockquote><br />Survivalism has seen popularity during the Cold War era (nuclear holocaust fears) and more recently during the Y2K "scare." (I was never that scared of Y2K anyways.) The article says that these days, the renewed interest in survivalism has been sparked by credit crises, housing bubble, economic woes, oil prices, and/or looming environment disasters. <br /><br />So why am I writing about this? Because I found it quite interesting that, to a small extent, (it feels a bit silly to admit this) the JunkFamily has given more than a few thoughts towards Survivalism Lite. It should probably be Survivalism Ultra Lite, since we are still on the grid in many, if not all areas where it's possible to be off the grid and self-sufficient.<br /><br />Lately, both of us have given thought to how we would manage if some event were to occur that would render us without power, or shut us in our homes. Our garden would be the biggest help. We hope to eventually be able to sustain our vegetable needs from our garden alone. Although much of our canned food is not ready-to-eat meals, they are still edible nonetheless; things like canned tomatoes and green beans. You'd usually not eat these by themselves, but if some crisis were to happen, sustenance is sustenance.<br /><br />All this talk of food, but I think water would be the most important thing. We had a couple of bulk packages of bottled water in the garage, but I think we used them up, since they had dates of 3/2008. In a doomsday scenario, I believe it would be water, and not gold or silver, that would be most valued as a barter item. The average person can survive weeks without food, but only days without water. Plus the fact that we can use water to cook, clean wounds, etc...<br /><br />Also included in some of our silly doomsday planning is a knowledge of herbal remedies. We are growing a number of historically medicinal herbs in our backyard. These include rosemary, lavender, thyme. We also have lots of garlic, which is something of a silver bullet, being anti-inflammatory, anti-bacterial, and anti-viral. Read about garlic at <a href="http://whfoods.org/genpage.php?tname=foodspice&dbid=60" target="newwindow3">World's Healthiest Foods</a>. They say that garlic is helpful against colds, flu, and stomach viruses. Stomach viruses are never a nice experience; stomach viruses during an apocalypse must be much worse ;) Honey is purportedly anti-bacterial, anti-viral, and anti-fungal. Read about <a href="http://whfoods.org/genpage.php?tname=foodspice&dbid=96" target="newwindow2">honey here</a>. Both of honey and garlic keep well, giving them extra pluses.<br /><br />I must admit that when I get a bad scrape or am feeling sick, garlic, honey, and herbs are not the first things I reach for. However, if you are running low on pharmaceutical medicine, are running low on water, and can't get to a doctor, a minor scrape could turn into an infection, which could turn deadly serious. In that case, you should use the non-pharmaceutical remedies as preventative measures against every little scrape that you get. <br /><br />If not for the NYT article, I probably wouldn't have written this blog post, since I felt silly writing about the measures that we take. We can't be the only ones who have thought about these things. So now's the time to confess: Have you ever considered these types of situations, and what measures do you have in place?JunkMalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02619673168896233941noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-29780103181640057012008-01-10T08:18:00.000-05:002008-01-10T08:18:38.398-05:00Healthy Foods, and Pontifications ThereofAs a public service, I refer you to an informative website called <a href="http://whfoods.org/" target="newwindow">The World's Healthiest Foods</a>. The title of the site should be self-explanatory.<br /><br />In particular, I like to read about all the <a href="http://whfoods.org/foodstoc.php" target="newwindow1">healthiest foods</a> themselves. Each food item has its own page with nutrient breakdowns and a collection of scientific studies done on the health benefits of that particular food. I also like to read the page about <a href="http://whfoods.org/nutrientstoc.php" target="newwindow2">essential nutrients</a>, which is sort of like the food list in reverse. If you've ever wondered why the recommended daily intake of manganese is 2 mg, you'll find out here. Each nutrient's page will tell you why it does what it does, what the deficiency might look like, what foods have the highest concentration of that nutrient, and what conditions will be helped by manganese intake (among other things).<br /><br />It's pleasing to see that many of the foods that Harmony and I eat are on there. In fact, there aren't many wildly exotic foods on there. Many are very common, like onions, tomatoes, apples, beans, brown rice, etc. Unfortunately, ice cream is not one of the food items on there :(<br /><br />I used to take a multivitamin fairly often. I think I stopped doing it about a year ago. I don't think taking a multivitamin is morally wrong or anything; I just wanted to try to be a natural as possible. Personally, I would rather get my nutrients from actual food items when possible.<br /><br />And yes, I am aware that <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature" target="newwindow3">natural ≠ safe-or-good</a>. After all, we see instances of polygamy and infanticide in nature. Ultratoxicdeathpoisons like <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conium" target="newinwdo4">hemlock</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oleander" target="newwindow5">oleander</a>, and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadly_nightshade" target="newwindwo6">deadly nightshade</a> are all natural as well. So while "all natural" does not always mean "all good," my tendency is to take preventative measures with healthy food* until I need an "unnatural" measure. For example, if I were to get cancer, I would probably go in for the conventional cancer treatments. I (as well as Harmony) would take an extremely concerted effort to ramp up the antioxidants in my daily diet. I know that's bad scientific method because variables (two different treatments) are not isolated, but when life is at stake, I might prefer to take the shotgun approach. Meaning I would throw lots of solutions at the problem and hope at least one works.<br /><br /><span style="font-size:85%;">* - For more on this, read the book </span><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Healing-Children-Naturally-Michael-Weiner/dp/0912845104/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1199970176&sr=8-1" target="newwindow6"><span style="font-size:85%;">Healing Children Naturally</span></a><span style="font-size:85%;">, by Michael Weiner, a.k.a. Michael Savage the conservative talk radio host, who has a Ph.D in nutritional ethnomedicine. Although the book is directed towards healing *children* naturally, I see little reason why the advice can't apply to adults as well.</span>JunkMalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02619673168896233941noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-19751974369260121542008-01-07T08:02:00.000-05:002008-12-09T17:10:01.393-05:00Robertson the FraudI would like to state publicly that I think Pat (a.k.a. Marion Gordon) Robertson is a fraud. Does anyone take this guy seriously? Apparently a few people have done so in the past, because he's filthy rich. <br /><br />This declaration of fraud is prompted by some more charlatan predictions Pat made last week. 2008 will be a year of worldwide violence, and that there will be an economic recession by 2010. Hmm, year of worldwide violence? As if 2007 and other preceding years have not been marked by worldwide violence. If you need proof, just look up the history of various African nations, or the whole Middle East. As for the recession prediction, I don't believe that sentiment uniquely belongs to Pat. <br /><br />He also said "We will see the presence of angels and we will see an intensification of miracles around the world." I'd have to consult the international agency which keeps metrics on miracles...but then again, there isn't one. "Intensification of miracles" is nigh impossible to prove with hard evidence/metrics, but it's also hard to disprove. So if Pat sees one miracle that happens somewhere, he can claim that that part of his statement came true. Convenient.<br /><br />At the beginning of 2007, Pat predicted that a terrorist attack would occur in the U.S. In May 2006, he predicted that the coasts of the U.S. would be pummeled by storms. Take a look at the 2006 hurricane maps for the Atlantic and Pacific coasts (red indicates the storm became a hurricane) :<br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh50IvZ9Jhfl-MlttA_lxWGSc7s-Jti7kzDrppTbzLSICG7MCZTfx5me_xPmyAF40SatKZ8jWD8V01tOz6mA59eNmqmTWfwkva9iNkTXTgW8cKUw5MnRCzm1HCbU9XwNpcJn9cBAg/s1600-h/2006_Atlantic_hurricane_season_map.png" target="newwindpw1"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh50IvZ9Jhfl-MlttA_lxWGSc7s-Jti7kzDrppTbzLSICG7MCZTfx5me_xPmyAF40SatKZ8jWD8V01tOz6mA59eNmqmTWfwkva9iNkTXTgW8cKUw5MnRCzm1HCbU9XwNpcJn9cBAg/s400/2006_Atlantic_hurricane_season_map.png" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5152711606561694978" /></a><br /><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_avUUQxpy30o/R4Ib6OskZRI/AAAAAAAAAJc/moThCkEMxCg/s1600-h/2006_Pacific_hurricane_season_map.png" target="newwindow2"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_avUUQxpy30o/R4Ib6OskZRI/AAAAAAAAAJc/moThCkEMxCg/s400/2006_Pacific_hurricane_season_map.png" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5152711610856662290" /></a><br /><br />To be fair, Pat did not specifically state that <i>hurricanes</i> would hit the coasts, and so these charts cannot 100% invalidate his claims. But you'd think that a year supposedly rife with storms would include at least one hurricane landfall.<br /><br /><a href="http://bible.cc/deuteronomy/18-22.htm" target="newwinwow">See what the book of Deuteronomy has to say about prophets whose prophecies don't come true.</a><br /><br />In the style of Pat Robertson, JunkMale will now make similarly vague predictions. The difference between me and Pat is that I don't claim God told me these things:<br /><ul><li>A football player will be killed in a car accident sometime in 2008. (deliberately vague, as "football" could refer to either soccer or American football.)</li><br /><li>Storms will pound the coast of the U.S. Or they might not.</li><br /><li>2008 will be a year of worldwide halitosis.</li><br /><li>There will be big news on the day of July 23rd, 2008. I don't know what it will be though.</li></ul>Just remember, you heard it here first.JunkMalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02619673168896233941noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-46254046996768106472007-10-12T07:13:00.000-04:002007-10-12T07:13:16.164-04:00Traffic To Our BlogIn an attempt to have a better blogging month than September, here's another metablog post. This one's about traffic to our blog.<br /><br />I'm proud to say that we are a Google #1 when someone searches for the phrase "origin of candlelight vigil," whether in quotes or not. In fact, if you search for the phrase with quotation marks, <a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2007/08/origin-of-candlelight-vigil.html" target="newwindow">my blog post on the matter</a> is the only result that comes up. Now, the fact that this Google query just leads you to another query is something that I need to work on. Now that I know that some other people out there have wondered the same question, I'm a little bit more motivated to do some actual library research. I can't just look up "candlelight vigils" though. I figure I probably would have to look under the history of Celts or druids or something like that, if I were to follow my original speculation. Any suggestions?<br /><br />A Google search for "interracial wedding pictures" will yield pictures of us on the first page. This was largely unintended, but a fair amount of people do search for such phrases, and come to our blog as a result.<br /><br />Speaking of which, our series of posts on our Turbulent Engagement recently achieved one of its primary missions. Someone else going through a very similar situation found <a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2006/12/our-turbulent-engagement-supplemental.html#comments" target="newwindow">the posts</a> and <a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2006/12/our-turbulent-engagement-part-3.html#comments" target="newwindow">actually found them helpful</a>! I believe as of the end of September, "pivotpivot" and her fiance were married, so congratulations, if you ever read our blog!<br /><br />Judging by Google referrals though, you'd think the subject of our blog was Korean rice, or Korean cooking. We get quite a few more visitors looking for that than anything else.<br /><br />I hope the relatively recent garden update additions haven't made this blog too unfocused. If the lack of focus enrages you, please let us know. Now, letting us know doesn't necessarily mean that we'll change things. But it would be nice to know. I know at least Ewokgirl likes seeing these updates ;)<br /><br />BTW, if you are a regular reader of this blog and have a blog yourself, please let us know so we can link you. And most certainly let us know if you've linked us and we haven't linked you. That would be dreadful indeed.JunkMalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02619673168896233941noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-56793048265757057892007-07-24T08:53:00.000-04:002007-07-24T08:56:12.884-04:00Life Expectancy<a href="http://blogs.wsj.com/numbersguy/the-numbers-behind-life-expectancy-152/">The Numbers Guy</a> has something to say about Michael Moore's movie, <span style="font-style: italic;">Sicko</span>. Does Cuba, as he suggests, have a higher life expectancy than the US? What does life expectancy mean? And is the country's health care system responsible for raising or lowering life expectancy?Harmonyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15105846442509828835noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-1374126327120134342007-04-30T13:30:00.000-04:002008-05-14T06:49:42.943-04:00Science and Global Warming: Part 1In my <a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2007/04/my-ignorance-concerning-climate-change.html">previous blog post</a>, I indicated that I had an interest in learning more about the science behind the debate. Here, for your perusal, is the first topic I tackled.<br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><b>Debate #1 - Global Warming will or will not lead to a greater instance of insect-borne diseases</b></span><br /><br />*World Health Organization (quoted from a <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/372219.stm">BBC article</a>):<br /><blockquote>"The World Health Organisation (WHO) says global warming could lead to a major increase in insect-borne diseases in Britain and Europe. It has called for urgent government action to prepare for the spread of diseases like malaria and encephalitis. The average temperature in Europe has increased by 0.8C during the past century and the average global temperature could rise by another 3.5C by the year 2100.... This would be accompanied by changes in rainfall patterns, greater precipitation and humidity in the atmosphere, and many new areas of floodwater. This in turn could lead to an increase in disease-carrying pests such as ticks, mosquitoes and rats, which live in warmer climates and whose breeding-grounds are often in damp areas."<br /></blockquote><br />*Professor Paul Reiter, Dept of Medical Entymology, Pasteur Institute, Paris<br />(transcribed by me from "<a href="http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4499562022478442170&q=great+global+warming+swindle">The Great Global Warming Swindle</a>", at appx 55 min into the program... please excuse any typos or inaccuracies)<br /><blockquote>"Mosquitoes are not specifically tropical. Most people will realize that in temperate regions there are mosquitoes. In fact, mosquitoes are extremely abundant in the Arctic. The most devastating epidemic of malaria was in the Soviet Union in the 1920's. There was something like 13 million cases a year, and something like 600,000 deaths - a tremendous catastrophe that reached up to the Arctic Circle. Archangel had 30,000 cases and about 10,000 deaths. So it's not a tropical disease. Yet these people in the global warming fraternity invent the idea that malaria will move northward."</blockquote>The following questions are raised from this debate:<br />1) Are malaria and encephalitis warm-climate diseases?<br />2) Do rats, mosquitoes and ticks currently live in cold climates in sufficient numbers to create outbreaks of disease?<br /><br />First, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaria">malaria</a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encephalitis">encephalitis</a>:<br />These days, malaria does tend to be a tropical/subtropical disease. However, before the use of insecticides, malaria was found in virtually every country in the world. King Louis XIV and Charles II both were struck with malaria. There was indeed an epidemic of malaria in Russia as far north as <a href="http://www.ships.ru/pics/ports/map_archangel.jpg">Archangel</a>, which is a port on the Arctic Sea. Mosquitoes are found everywhere -- although they hibernate for part of the year in colder climates. This may be one part of the argument which is founded. In temperatures under ~50F, the female mosquitoes go into hibernation. If the climate change was sufficient enough to raise winter temperatures that high, there would be mosquitoes all year round. This might explain the difficulty in eradicating the disease in tropical locations. I would say that there is a possibility of regions where there are already incidences of malaria to have increased (perhaps even epidemic) numbers of cases, depending on the actual rise in temperature. Countries where the disease has already been eradicated are already using insecticides to prevent the re-introduction of the disease -- their problem, I would imagine, would be finding new ways to kill resistant mosquitoes, not dealing with epidemics.<br /><br />Prior to today, I knew next to nothing about encephalitis. The disease is often a complication to another disease, such as rabies, syphilis, toxoplasma, or bacterial meningitis. Rabies is transmitted by the bite of a mammal (rodents, such as rats, are rarely infected). Bacterial meningitis is not transmitted through insects or rodents. Syphilis is an STD. Toxoplasma is often contracted through contact with house cat feces, and is not very easy to catch. Only sensitive individuals, such as pregnant women, the very young or elderly, and those already sick would be likely to contract encephalitis through this method. There is one form of encephalitis that is transmitted through ticks, known as Tick Borne Encephalitis (TBE). This form is most common in Europe and Asia, with the death rate somewhere around 1% of all cases. Encephalitis epidemics are pretty rare. There was an outbreak of a rare form of encephalitis (known as 'sleeping sickness', not to be confused with the disease with the same name transmitted via tse-tse fly) which was perhaps caused by diplococcus bacterium, or perhaps infected individuals who were weak from the Spanish Flu outbreak which occurred in the same general time frame. I found no link between this outbreak and the TBE variant of the disease. I do not see how an increase in temperature would hasten the spread of encephalitis.<br /><br />Conclusion: Encephalitis is NOT a warm-weather disease. Malaria might possibly have an easier time spreading in a climate that rarely dips below 50F, but has historically appeared in extremely cold climates.<br /><br />Rats, mosquitoes, and ticks:<br />I already learned that mosquitoes do live in the arctic, so they are not exclusively warm-weather insects. However, in a warmer climate they would have much more time available to reproduce. So how do they live up North? Answer: <a href="http://www.athropolis.com/arctic-facts/fact-mosquito.htm">swarms</a>. No wonder the outbreak in Archangel was so bad! Rats live almost everywhere on earth. Good luck getting rid of them, even if the world were to go into another Ice Age. I'm having a hard time finding information on where ticks live, but from the best I can tell, their habitat is generally in the eastern coast of Africa, North America, the Eurasian Steppe, India, and the Mediterranean. Typical tropical areas such as Central and South America, Central Africa, and Southeast Asia are conspicuously absent from the <a href="http://www.ciesin.columbia.edu/docs/001-613/map27.gif">maps</a> I was able to <a href="http://www.ciesin.columbia.edu/docs/001-613/map26.gif">find</a>. This does not mean that they do not live in tropical areas, just that they were not on those maps. It does, however, mean that ticks live in non-tropical regions all over the world.<br /><br />Conclusion: rats, mosquitoes, and ticks do not exclusively live in tropical areas. They are all present in sufficient numbers in non-tropical areas to be causing troubles already.<br /><br />Based on the evidence I found, I would tend to agree with Dr Reiter rather than the WHO. I think he might have oversimplified a few things, but then again I am not the Professor of Medical Entymology.<br /><br />And for your further enjoyment, here is more from the documentary (continuing on after the original quote at the top of the page):<br />According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), "mosquito species that transmit malaria do not usually survive where the mean winter temperature dips below 16-18C." Professor Reiter responds, "I was horrified to read the second and the third assessment reports, because there was so much misinformation without any kind of recourse, or virtually without mention of the scientific literature -- the truly scientific literature, literature by specialists in those fields." He further states, "When I resigned from the IPCC, I thought that was the end of it. But when I saw the final draft, my name was still there, so I asked for it to be removed. Well, they told me that I had contributed, so it would remain there. So I said, 'No, I haven't contributed, because they haven't listened to anything I've said.' So in the end it was quite a battle, but finally I threatened legal action against them and they removed my name. And I think this happens a great deal. Those people who are specialists but don't agree with the polemic and resign -- there have been a number that I know of -- they are simply put on the author list and become part of this '2500 of the world's top scientists'."Harmonyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15105846442509828835noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-15662784505846357262007-04-30T10:59:00.000-04:002008-05-14T06:49:42.944-04:00My Ignorance Concerning Climate ChangeI am tired of my lack of knowledge on how climate works. I hear one side saying that man is causing global warming, and the other saying that this is bad science. The 'man' side says that the 'sun' side is in the pockets of the oil companies. The 'sun' side says that the 'man' side is full of communists who want to take down capitalism. So who do you believe? The problem is that I know next to nothing about climatology. So whatever I believe is going to be based not on my knowledge of the scientific workings of the atmosphere, sun, climate, pollution, etc, but on <span style="font-style: italic;">what someone else tells me</span>. Something tells me that the majority of other earthlings subject to this debate are in the same boat as I am.<br /><br />But I don't like being ignorant. Ergo, I have decided to visit the local library for books on climatology, meteorology, weather, etc. I want to learn enough about the subject so that I can make an *informed* decision, rather than taking someone else's word at face value.<br /><br />There are a few subjects that interest me more than others. I watched a fascinating video called "The Great Global Warming Swindle" (which I would recommend everyone watch) in which they threw around a whole lot of scientific terms that seemed very credible to me -- but that I want to know more about. One scientist mentioned that a basis for the study of severe weather is that the greater delta T (that is, the change in temperature) between the poles and the equator, the greater the chance for severe weather. This does not readily mesh with traditional global warming propaganda (for lack of a better term), which has made the public believe that if the Earth warms, there will be more hurricanes, tornadoes, thunderstorms, etc. If the scientist's claim was correct, it would mean that unless the temperature at the equator was rising at a greater rate than that at the poles, the incidence of severe weather would remain largely the same as it has generally been. And, without having studied the subject myself, there seems to be no reason why global warming would effect the equatorial regions of the Earth more than the poles.<br /><br />But the truth is that I have no idea if that particular scientist (or any others, from either camp) was making a valid claim, and I'm tired of being part of the uninformed masses.<br /><br />If you, too, would like to learn more about how the Earth's weather and climate works, you can find information about meteorology in section 551 at your library. Looking through 533 (on gases -- for information on atmosphere) might also be useful. 508 (natural history) might contain some good information about Ice Ages and possibly something about the Medieval Warm Period. If you want to know more about how the sun works, try 523 (Specific celestial bodies & phenomena). Be sure to browse all of the 550s (Earth Sciences) just in case another interesting title catches your eye.<br /><br />Oh, and if you want to know more about the global warming debate/problem, be sure to also check out 363 - Other Social Problems and Services.<br /><br />Depending on my continued interest in this subject, there might be more posts on the science behind weather/climate/global warming to come.Harmonyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15105846442509828835noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-84029178445000403892007-04-25T11:30:00.000-04:002007-04-26T07:18:41.575-04:00April's RandomnimityRandom tidbits not necessarily large enough their own dedicated blog post:<br /><br /><b><u>Economics and the Chicken-or-Egg?</u></b><br />Does economic news drive the market, or does the market drive economic news? I've been following economic news somewhat casually these days, and sometimes it seems that the market goes down based on what certain people say. So why don't these people keep on forecasting good news? And when presented with hard data on rougher times, just spin it into something good? This is, of course, somewhat of a joke, but who knows...perhaps economic news drives the market sometimes.<br /><br />So as a public service, I hereby do my part to help the economy.<br /><blockquote><i>In a news release today, JunkMale announced a bright outlook on U.S. economic growth for the next century. With increased profits from all businesses nationwide, JunkMale suggests that everyone should save lots of money and invest it in the stock market so they can save for a proper retirement. JunkMale also forecasted that the Fed would lower interest rates and that useless government agencies such as the Department of Education and the Internal Revenue Service would be drastically reduced or completely eliminated. Investors will undoubtedly perk at this news. JunkMale could not be reached for further comment.</i></blockquote><br /><b><u>Giuliani</u></b><br />...does not have my vote because he's an adulterer and a social liberal. If you consider moral character an important quality in a president, do consider that he's divorced twice and had an extramarital affair. I don't know about you, but that just doesn't click with me. And on the issue of abortion, he is what I consider wishy-washy; support the "woman's right [sic] to choose" but is personally against abortion. Give me a break. I'm all for choice where choice is due, but this is a human life we're talking about. The abortion issue is the make-or-break issue for me; I will never vote for a pro-death candidate, no matter how good he is on other issues. <br /><br /><b><u>Police in Iraq</u></b><br />Let me state that I do not condone killing of human beings. As far as loss of life goes in Iraq, it's somewhat of a lose/lose situation: if rules of engagement are loose or non-existent, then maybe more innocent Iraqis will die; if the rules are as thick as a phonebook, then our military men might suffer more deaths. Have ground troops in Iraq not been turned into a police force? Is policing not best done by police? As I recall, the military teaches its troops to kill, and to kill with deadly precision. Anyways, that's just an opinion, and I fully state that I have not done extensive research on that. Please feel free to correct me.<br /><br /><b><u>Pineapple</u></b><br />...is one of many gifts bestowed on mankind by a most gracious and loving God.JunkMalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02619673168896233941noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-55972098417543182232007-04-18T07:12:00.000-04:002007-04-18T07:53:07.334-04:00JunkMale Partakes in the ArtsIn recent days, I have been partaking in the arts. In this case, "arts" refers to playing piano and guitar. <br /><br />Upon thinking about it for a bit, "arts" seems to refer to things that usually don't allow the average person to make a good living. Sure, people like Eddie Van Halen, Stevie Ray Vaughn, Hilary Hahn, and Picasso made/make a lot of money. But if I'm not mistaken, most people usually can't make a living doing only art.<br /><br /><aside><br />It is a great travesty that the guitar solo has "gone out of style" in popular contemporary rock music. It is my opinion that the ability to play or improvise a good guitar solo is always preceded by LOTS of practice. And so it's hard to play good solos and consistently improvise fresh and different sounding solos. To me, good guitar soloing is not something that goes "out of style." This is like saying that the sonata or cantata is out of style as a musical form because no one writes in those forms much anymore. Van Gogh is not "out of style" because he's not alive anymore. So just as true art stands the test of time and doesn't go out of style, so too do guitar solos. Just because the human talent is not there to produce the art of choice, does not mean the art is out of style.<br /></aside><br /><br />I took piano lessons for about 8 years in my earlier days. I never really liked it much, but in the end, I grudgingly admit that it was good for me, and I also grudgingly admit that I am glad my parents made me take piano for a period of time. From 8th grade to sometime in high school, I took guitar lessons. I progressed much quicker in guitar because I actually wanted to learn, and I actually enjoyed it.<br /><br />My playing of music seems to come and go in spurts. A couple of months ago, I would play my select hymns on the piano quite often. By my select hymns, I mean my favorites that I have devoted lots of practice towards in order to master. Not coincidentally, these happen to be arrangements that are written in keys with few flats or sharps. These include some of my favorites like "Glorious Things of Thee are Spoken," "Abide With Me," and "Glory Be to Jesus." I personally do not know how pianists keep track of so many flats and sharps. The only reason I can plunk my way through songs written in Eb is because lots of hymn arrangements are written in that key.<br /><br />Before the piano phase was another guitar phase. Before the wedding, I would spend my evenings reading political non-fiction and trying to master "Jesu, Joy of a Man's Desire." Now, I know that this is one of those extremely common wedding songs that I would NEVER have allowed in my own wedding, but I must admit that I do like the song outside the context of a wedding ceremony.<br /><br />And so after the aforementioned piano phase comes the guitar phase that I am currently in. When we visited Harmony's grandmother earlier this month, I brought my guitar because she had wanted to hear me play. So I brushed up on Jesu and resumed trying to master it. From there, I got it in my head to try to learn Bach's Cello Suite No. 1 in G major (BWV 1007). Yes, another commonly known piece, but perhaps a bit more difficult than Jesu. Or not, who knows. <br /><br />Recently, I've found a site that has totally free downloads of classical piano recordings. The site was founded by a group of professional and amateur pianists who wanted some exposure for their work. And so they upload free MP3s of their recordings. I somehow randomly discovered Bach's cantata commonly referred to as "Sleepers Awake" (BWV 140). So I've gotten in my head to learn this one on guitar too. My wife has informed me that this one is not uncommon either. In spite of feeling so pedestrian, I am still resolved no longer to linger and to learn it forthright.<br /><br />And so as a public service to you, I provide you the link of the <a href="http://pianosociety.com/cms/index.php?section=6" target="newwindow">free classical piano music site</a>. If anyone else has obscure classical favorites, please feel free to leave a long list. Doubleplusgood if these songs have guitar arrangements available on the internet.JunkMalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02619673168896233941noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-48231809429372525332007-04-02T12:18:00.000-04:002007-04-02T12:57:51.693-04:00In Touch With My Feminine SideIs it a bit strange that most of our links point to blogs largely run by women? I guess it could be considered getting in touch with my feminine side, considering I'm the one that put most of them there.<br /><br />It's a guilty pleasure, I know. I like what these Christian blogging women have to say. I appreciate the fact that they are standing up for what they believe is a Godly way to cultivate a family (and I agree with them 100%). For those who might not be normal readers, what might that be? Staying at home with yer kids, cooking food from scratch, saving your family money, popping out lots of kids, homeschooling, acknowledging yer role as a helper to your husband, and actually being the helper, among other things. Is that politically uncorrect? Oh dear, I'm um, so..um... I'm so not sorry.<br /><br />I haven't really been able to find too many MAN-blogs that appeal to me that much. I should say Christian-focused MAN-blogs (I read a couple of personal finance blogs that are MAN-run). Maybe it's because I'm lazy and haven't looked hard enough. A good number of blogs that I like to read are ones that Mrs. JunkFemale likes to read. The rest are blogs of people who read here often. Not surprisingly, these are blogs created by women. Anyways, I suppose that I should consciously be on the lookout for Christian MAN-blogs with similar outlooks.<br /><br />I guess one reason behind my guilty pleasure readership of estrogen-fueled blogs is that it's quite a refresher from the normal feminism that pervades today's society. A lot of times it even pervades the church. It's different in a good way. Plus the fact that women are just plain different from men. It's funny to read about women being girly and being afraid of critters and making their husbands come dispose of the dead/alive remains. I suppose women might write in subtly different ways, but I'm not consciously able to recall noticing these differences right now. Do Harmony and I write our entries wildly differently? <br /><br />Are the Christian women bloggers out there surprised and made uncomfortable when some man-blogger unexpectedly shows up on their blog? <br /><br />Unrelated public service note, pertaining to chaotic password generation:<br />Open any word processing program. Lift your keyboard up and flip it over so the keys are facing downward. Drop the keyboard, and make note of what comes up on the screen. Repeat as necessary. This method is quite useful if you've been trying to convince your spouse that you really need to upgrade your keyboard to that rad new one. It's also quite useful in demonstrating a small aspect of chaos theory (sensitive dependence on initial conditions).<br /><br />OR open the word processing program and give keyboard to your pet monkey or toddler. Wrest keyboard from paws after 37 seconds, fix what's necessary, and make note of what was typed. Tweak as necessary to increase password strength and help you remember it. Toddlers, monkeys, and gravity. That is pretty random, if you ask me.JunkMalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02619673168896233941noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-43841743564041232012007-03-30T10:52:00.000-04:002007-03-30T11:12:34.123-04:00More Admin Details, and Public ServiceMoved the external links to the bottom of the sidebar. I've linked the people who come often to our humble blog. If you come here often and want your blog linked, comment here and let me know. Or if you are reclusive and don't want people coming to your blog, first of all, why do you have a blog? And second of all, let me know and I will remove your link.<br /><br />This public service bit of humorous observation is brought to you by JunkMale:<br />You know how sometimes you see those criminal work crews by the sides of the road? Good that they are "repaying their debt" to society. There are usually bright signs by them saying things like "County Jail Workers." Sometimes I see those signs...but I don't see any jail workers. This worries me.<br /><br />More public service in the form of free MP3s of hymns.<br /><a href="http://kleinwoodcofc.org/mp3_downloads.html" target="newwindow">Kleinwood Church of Christ</a> (lots of songs, quality's not bad)<br /><a href="http://www.letgodbetrue.com/worship/songs/index.htm" target="newwindow">Church of Greenville</a> (very good quality, doctrine is a bit...hardline)<br /><a href="http://web.ics.purdue.edu/~mdwyer/songs.htm" target="newwindow">Lafayette Church of Christ</a><br /><a href="http://web.ics.purdue.edu/~bob/christian_mp3/index.htm" target="newwindow">Psalms, Hymns, and Spiritual Songs</a><br /><a href="http://www.lds.org/cm/catalogalphamp3/1,18331,4768-1,00.html" target="newwindow">Mormons sing some of God's greatest hits</a> (and insert some hits of their own, such as "Joseph Smith's First Prayer")<br /><a href="http://www.plymouth-church.com/hymns.html" target="newwindow">Plymouth Church of Christ hymn recordings</a> (bad to horrible quality, but at least they're there)<br /><a href="http://www.linary.com/music/songs-praisinghimii.htm" target="newwindow">Linary Church of Christ</a><br /><a href="http://www.grkat.nfo.sk/eng/music.html" target="newwindow">Byzantine choir chant</a> (haven't listened to much at all, but it could be good)JunkMalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02619673168896233941noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-20414324444011708382007-03-28T12:42:00.000-04:002007-06-01T09:09:07.792-04:00The Distilled BlogFrom observing our Site Meter, I've found that we seem to have a very small following of frequent readers. As a public service, I bring you the distillation of our blog. Here are some past blog entries which relatively new readers might be interested in.<br /><br />Our Turbulent Engagement Series:<br /><a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2006/11/our-turbulent-engagement-part-1.html">Part 1</a><br /><a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2006/11/our-turbulent-engagement-supplemental.html">Supplemental</a><br /><a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2006/11/our-turbulent-engagement-part-2.html">Part 2</a><br /><a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2006/12/our-turbulent-engagement-supplemental.html">Supplemental 2</a><br /><a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2006/12/our-turbulent-engagement-part-3.html">Part 3</a><br /><br />JunkMale's Randomnimity:<br /><a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2006/11/personal-ad.html">JunkMale puts out a personal ad</a><br /><a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2006/12/some-reasons-why-i-need-woman.html">Why JunkMale needs a woman</a><br /><a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2006/12/time-capsule-to-be-opened-circa-2025.html">JunkMale writes a message to his future self</a><br /><a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2007/01/junkmale-has-two-mommies.html">JunkMale has two mommies</a><br /><a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2007/01/two-truths-and-lie.html">JunkMale's Two Truths and a Lie</a><br /><br />Pictures:<br /><a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2006/11/faces-to-put-with-names.html">Us</a><br /><a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2006/11/wedding-portraits.html">Studio Portraits</a><br /><a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2007/01/wedding-pictures.html">Wedding </a><br /><a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2006/12/aftermath.html">Log cabin</a><br /><br />Christianity related:<br /><a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2006/11/wisdom-of-ecclesiastes-part-i.html">Wisdom of Ecclesiastes</a>, and here's <a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2006/12/wisdom-of-ecclesiastes-part-ii.html">Part 2</a><br /><a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2006/11/my-abcs-of-hymns.html">Harmony's ABC's of hymns</a>, and <a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2006/12/junkmales-abcs-of-hymns.html">JunkMale's</a><br /><a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2007/01/nothing-new-under-sun.html">Nothing New Under the Sun</a><br /><a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2007/02/because-hes-god-and-he-said-so.html">Because God Said So</a><br /><br />Comment getters:<br /><a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2007/01/reason-80-gazillion-to-homeschool.html">Yet another reason to homeschool</a><br /><a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2007/01/korean-bbq-ribs.html">Korean BBQ Ribs</a><br /><a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2007/01/making-meat-go-further-with-eggs.html">Making Meat Go Further With Eggs</a><br /><a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2007/02/children-from-purely-financial-view.html">Children from a Financial View</a><br /><br />Just Because:<br /><a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2007/02/speaks-for-itself.html">No explanation needed</a><br /><a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2007/02/millstone-for-every-boston-accent.html">Argh</a><br /><br />Don't feel like you can't comment on any of these just because they're older entries. We always like getting comments.JunkMalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02619673168896233941noreply@blogger.com1