To Have Sprung Spring

I'm getting bad at updating The AstroSite. But this is by no means a precedent. My excuses include finals week, a six day trip to Seattle, the Oregon Society for Neuroscience meeting, and an approaching tax deadline. But enough excuses. The important thing is that it's spring! While those that know me will know well enough that my favorite season (by far) is autumn, the paganite within me celebrates all seasons. And spring is no different. Yes my fellow cyber friends, an organic rebirth is among us. Spring is "springing" all around. I've noticed that spring in the Pacific Northwest, as opposed to the Midwest, is dominated by tree flowers. And as you probably are aware, there are many trees in Portland, hence many, many flowers. In fact, as polluted as city air may be, right now my bike commute really does smell like roses. And the foliage is of pink and white confetti. This maternal environment arouses equanimity and anticipation -- it is as though our ancestral genes relax after helping the organism though the "Dead Seasons" of fall and winter.

I think many of us share these feelings when spring arrives, so much so, that maybe we should move the New Year to April 1st. It is hard to find motivation for change -- of which is the nature of most new year resolutions -- in the dark, cold (and wet in Portland) days of January. This is especially relevant to the popular American ambition to lose weight. January 1st may be the WORST date to decide to diet, maybe in part because our genetic baggage is expecting more months of starvation. Moreover, it is more difficult to exercise in the cold and dark winter days. But the spring...Ah, this season is nearly texting your mobile phone with words of encouragement to go outside and play.

So be it. Forget January 1st. This Saturday, April 1st is the New Year, 2006 (realize that also makes you three months younger). Nurture all that callused baggage you've accumulated over the past six months and reveal something new. Something beautiful. Something alive. Millions of other species, from insects to oak trees, are heeding the same advice. Why should we be any different?

Hometown Reds

I've got the blues over the Reds in my home state. With help from a religious conservative base, South Dakota made it a crime this week to perform an abortion, except in the rare case to save the mother's life. I strongly oppose this law. There are a number of reasons as to why I oppose -- even abhor -- this new law, but I will expound on just one reason here for the sake of brevity. Importantly, I can respect a difference of opinion. I will not harangue, rather, I will elicit one of my perspectives as dialogue.

Outlawing abortion is another major advance toward outlawing our American freedoms. Americans are currently experiencing unprecedented freedom restrictions under the Patriot Act and other less-characterized laws. For example, it is currently legal to be imprisoned indefinitely without a warrant, have our phone conversations tapped and our mail opened, have our bank records monitored, and even have our houses searched without a warrant. At the same rate, when our "leaders" speak publicly, protestors are restricted to "Free Speech Zones" (oxymoron alert!), which are sometimes placed blocks away from the speaker's location. And all of this is tolerated in the name of security.

This includes the latest attack on our freedom, South Dakota's abortion ban. In eyes of the anti-choice individual, "The unborn are now safe from abortion and have been granted the freedom of a human citizen". Biology aside (which I admit is difficult for me), freedoms have simply transferred, not increased. A fetus will now indeed be granted the freedom to mature in South Dakota (assuming it even can mature in the case of incest). But once that fetus matures and is born as an infant, there will now be two people with restricted freedoms instead of one. There will be little freedom for the new mother and child, as both will not find much help from our bankrupt social services system. A vast number of abortions are performed because the mother is too poor, too uneducated, too young, too sick, or too unstable to raise a child properly. The result from these women delivering children will burden primarily mother and child, followed by the public, thereby further limiting everyone's freedoms. Obviously, the ideal solution is to prevent these pregnancies from happening in the first place. But power begets freedom. And when one is born without power (e.g. poor and uneducated), one is likely to grow up without the power. This is the system that maintains the freedom of powerful people -- such as the people voting to outlaw abortion in South Dakota. Hence, the social service system will be burdened even more by eliminating abortions. This increases the crime rate, including rape and prostitution, and the cycle repeats exponentially, leaving everyone less secure. How ironical.

For the cause of preserving the freedoms of every American citizen, especially that of the mother, I reject any attempts to outlaw abortion in the United States. If you reject the South Dakota law, there are many ways your voice can be heard, one of which is by hitting South Dakota where it would hurt most: tourism. Send your intents to boycott visiting South Dakota by contacting the Secretary of the Department of Tourism and State Development, James Hagan, and the Director of the Office of Tourism, Billie Joe Waara, via e-mail at: sdinfo@state.sd.us

Yarrrrrhhhhhh!!!!

Yes, I'm still alive; no I have not become a pirate (although I've been tempted to try that career). I just realized that it has been a while since I've updated The Astrosite. Unfortunately, the site will remain unintelligibly updated for a little longer. I have been blessed with visitors for the past two weeks, which managed to push off updating this blog and a LOT of school work -- until now; hence the Yarrrrrrrhhhh! If only international "Talk Like A Pirate Day" was more than once a year (it's currently on September 19th). What a great holiday! I've been kicking around the pirate talk lately since my good friend, Josh, and I crawled the pubs of Portland last weekend, proving that beer really can stimulate intelligible conversation. So me mateys, hang in there and the Astrosite will be back soon (insert here a parrot voice summarizing the main point -- GAWK!!!). There is much to discuss. Much to discuss. Especially my vociferous little home state and its intent to move AWAY from the 21st Century -- in addition to the recent abortion ban, it is now legal to ride and horse and bicycle while drunk. Yarrrrrhhhhh!!!!!

To keep you interested until we meet again, copy this link into your browser:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Talk_Like_A_Pirate_Day

Conspiracy Furry

I came across the film, "Loose Change," while browsing Google's video website. I have an obligation as a scientists (and often as an American citizen) to be as objective as possible. This, of course, can be very difficult at times -- even impossible. But restraint and time seem to be the best tools toward reaching clear conclusions. Therefore, I have not made my conclusion about "Loose Change". But the film is at its least intriguing and challenging. Now, I am not about to dive into the "conspiracy of 9/11" or my own beliefs; this is not the place for that as it would easily be the match for the forest fire. Rather, I want to concentrate entirely on the film.

I have been familiar with most of the arguments made in "Loose Change," such as the possible demolition of the Twin Towers and the cruise missile strike against the Pentagon. These theories have been circulating for some time, but with disparate evidence. So it was interesting to see additional evidence supporting these theories, as well as evidence (or lack there of) for theories that have not been highly circulated, such as incorrect engine turbines found at the Pentagon crash site. The film producers have done an enormous amount of research. This is essential when presenting such polemical -- even blasphemous -- arguments. Nearly every point made is supported with some form of evidence, whether documents, witness interviews, or pictures and film. And I especially enjoyed how "Loose Change" used initial media reports from major news organizations, such as ABC News, to support some of the film's claims. For example, soon after the first tower collapse, Peter Jennings comments how similar the collapse looks to a controlled demolition -- not what one would expect from a catastrophic structure failure. Similar descriptions were given on CNN and other networks. The film presents much more evidence than this, of course, but it demonstrates that after years indoctrinating the "The Official Story," we easily overlook some of the initial observations.

The problem with "Loose Change" is that the producers made a short story, not A Story. After touring all three events on Septermber 11th, 2001, exposing holes in The Official Story, the film ends without stating a motive or tying its points together. In other words: why? If the events of September 11th are indeed an unthinkable government crime or cover-up, what is the motive? I can think of plenty of motives, but the film leaves this question a hanging chad. If "Loose Change" wishes to make a cogent argument to skeptics, it must address evidence for a motive. Moreover, some of the evidence they use is dubious at best. An example of this problem is the often grainy video used by the film to draw conclusions. These problems, however, should be taken with some forgiveness as the film is in its nascent stages. "Loose Change" is scheduled to be revamped into a full-length theatrical release later this year. I will expect a much more polished, cohesive story.

Regardless, "Loose Change" makes one very strong point that is difficult to refute: The Official Story has many holes -- so many holes that it may be a conspiracy theory itself. Clearly, "The Truth" about the events that took place that day will never be known. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't pursue answers. This, however, is an argument I've already made (see my 01.17.06 blog post).

I encourage you to watch this film and draw your own conclusions. Just click on the link below to watch Loose Change. There is also a "Version 2," but I think "Version 1" is better for brevity's sake. Importantly, downloading the film (right column) and then watching it will allow for a higher resolution viewing.

Loose Change

Scientizzle's Blog -- Now With A Working Link!

I have learned that since The Astrosite's inception, my friend, "Scientizzle's," blog link was not functioning -- nor was my Mercy Corps. link. Both problems have been fixed. I encourage you visit Mr. "Scientizzle's" site as it is updated frequently and provides a nice contrast to the heavy self-indulgence of my blog.

...And on an unrelated note, congratulations to the Seahawks for finally representing the Pacific Northwest in the Super Bowl! But my sudden interest in football is quite an anomaly, I assure you. My friends have been shocked that I even knew of "The Game" today, let alone that I wanted to watch it. While it wasn't a great game (in the sense of being nail-biter), it is always welcome to see victory anoint a team for the first time. So yes, when "The Game" is on again soon, I'll be watching and rooting for "D," who I've discovered is always the most popular player in sports.

To Be Or Not To See?

When I was in high school I wrote a short essay on "The Truth". My inchoate, adolescent mind was able to come to two conclusions: it either doesn't exist or we cannot know it. This fleeting entity has humbled human effort for ages. It flunks to no intellect; fractures to no strength; loses to no slight of hand. The Truth is the deceiver of deceivers; it is exclusively the knowledge of God. So why pursue it? Every person I've ever met has surrendered a part of their life to pursuing something unobtainable. What madness! There is no better example of such a person than myself: an aspiring neuroscientist. But maybe it is the pursuit of the truth that gives all fallacy meaning. If, for instance, the absolute nature of an orange was known, then what? It won't matter how the orange tastes, or its color, or its weight, or its origin. All those things will be known to everyone, everywhere, forever. The orange is resolved. And that is boring. I don't want to eat that orange. It is the mystery in an orange's texture and flavor -- the diverse opinions from people that may describe the orange differently -- that allow the orange to be delicious. And it is this type of mystery that oils the sprockets of human purpose. We shall never know The Truth unless we are to be purposeless, or for a more savvy muse, unless we are to be God. But it can also be argued that the truth doesn't exist at all; hence, the orange has no true nature, just fleeting existences. Humans, including myself, have problems with this second perspective. Without The Truth, there can be no pursuit of it, and with no pursuit comes no meaning. So then maybe our lives have no meaning. Obviously this won't settle well either. I have plenty of experiences, people, and places that certainly have meaning to me. In homage to Descartes, we do exist because we can ask if we exist. This ability is truly beautiful; it is God's signature. Our brain -- an organized mass of carbon-based molecules -- knows it exists. But do the mouse neurons I'm culturing in the incubator right now know they exist? If they do not, at what point do they gain "awareness"? On the contrary, if they do know they exist, then must my orange also know that it exists? What madness! Perhaps the only truth we will ever know is that we cannot obtain the truth; to do so would be to know the mind of God. And to know the mind of God is to be God, which we're clearly not. And now I'm back to where I started (how humanly typical!): we know nothing.

No matter your perspective on what The Truth is or isn't, it is imperative to respect The Truth (which is precisely what many cultures have been doing for ages through the lore of deities). Unfortunately, abuse of The Truth is rampant. It is as though our brains have gained some serious evolutionary hangtime as a cost for the launch of our consciousness. We have evolved, are aware, and can now "see," but the sheer glare from the intangible Truth can scare us into believing just about anything so long as we don't have to float in a void of blind pursuit. I've been immensely disappointed in people that are supposedly engaged in the pursuit of The Truth for passion's sake (such as a true [pun not intended!] scientist); yet these same people make perfunctory assumptions to which they prescribe as The Truth. We are all guilty of doing this for time to time, but problems arise when pertinacious acknowledgements are made that "The Truth" has been reached. For example, when I would see dark, black clouds while living in South Dakota, I assumed it was going to rain and acted appropriately -- like finishing my beer in the garage. But I didn't cancel the party because maybe it would not rain despite the ominous sky. In this example I acknowledged the truth as a probability, not as The Truth. Likewise, just because two people are dating doesn't mean they are having sex; just because someone is a beer aficionado doesn't mean they drink too much; just because someone deplores George W. Bush doesn't mean that they are a Democrat; Hence, in the search for meaning, we easily lose it. We cannot, nor shouldn't try to dupe The Truth. It will always have the last word. We must respect that. Just as there are, no doubt, 35 black dots in that image above, the glory -- the meaning -- is in the pursuit, not in the nature of The Truth.

Happy Year of the Dog

I'm not sure I know what it means, but my calander told me this morning that 2006 is to be 'Year Of The Dog.' This is somewhat appropriate since the Dog Genome was recently sequenced, but obviously the timing could have been better had that discovery waited a few months. Regardless, it has been way too long since I've updated this, but it's not like anyone has been checking it anyway, so I guess I shouldn't care. But I did have a good friend give me a pumpkin bread recipe (see earlier postings).

2005 was an incredibly intense and complex year for me. I'll spare the details, as much of the details are too personal for the public forum. But in sum, it was a transition year. Or better, a reconstruction year. Old foundations were completely demolished and restructured. The glory in this toil is the confidence that my new life structure will be better than the old. Change is hard, but for someone like myself who is constantly searching -- exploring -- for The Human Experience, change is growth. And, unless you're a tumor, growth is good. There is nothing novel or profound about this statement; rather, it's that the weight of the statement is now understood. I have completely reconstructed relationships, beliefs, and perspectives, all of which are very heavy stones in a very human house. I look forward to 2006 as a year of refinement (after, of course, my coming bouts with lots and lots of dogs). I don't think anyone has the capacity to tolerate constant change, nor should they. Refinement is focus -- clarity -- and right now 2005 remains as a tenacious hangover. And so, like everything else, I am at the mercy of time. Patience will be required to allow refinement of the profound changes I experienced in 2005. And in a paradoxical way, NOT working at achieving this coveted focus is likely to yield the clearest picture. Some things are tarnished by effort; they are, in a sense, live entities in themselves that must prosper on their own. 2005 is one of those entities for me and will require time to mature. So I wait in anticipation for 2006. Like the product of a genetic code, a year's product is an amalgam of elements you can and cannot control. And since probability is required to give you as many deleterious as beneficial uncontrolled elements, utilizing even the smallest amount of controllable elements in your favor is bound to lead to a mostly good year. How's that for an analytical approach!

I hope all of you find at least some good reflections in 2005; may 2006 embrace your best ambitions.

Happy New Year!

Five Feet

Five feet can be a good or bad thing depending on the context. And even within the context of snow, it can be a good or bad thing. I remember when five feet of snow was a very bad thing while trying to drive from Billy's house to my college dorm. My roommate actually contracted a severe case of pneumonia that day helping idiots like me trying to navigate Honda's amongst the drifts. On Sunday five feet of snow was a very good thing. Kristin and I went snowboarding at Mt. Hood Meadows for our first session of the season. Last year at this time, Mt. Hood Meadows lived up to its name -- literally. Vignettes of butterflies, grass, and...no snow come to mind. This year the only butterflies were in our stomachs while gaping at a freshly white-coated Mountain.

We attempted at first to go up Saturday, but a series of unfortunate events pushed the trek to Sunday. But fate was on our side. Friday and Saturday shook snow out of the clouds with violent winds, but Sunday the clouds and winds relinquished to sun and lots, and lots of powder, or "sugar" as I like to call it. I had never seen such outstanding conditions upon Portland's most trampled playground. Mt. Hood was shining. We stayed as far from the crowds as possible, hugging the eastern flank most of the day. The scenery was indescribable. And to stay true to that statement I won't attempt to describe it beyond a few fleeting adjectives: Silver. Floating. Breathless. We were but vapor above the corporal Earth. If I had pictures, I would post them. But your imagination will probably suit the imagery best anyway; lenses have a knack for distorting proportions.

The end of the day brought with it a celebration of our new favorite length: five feet. With our feet emancipated from our plastic snow vehicles, we leaped into snow that crested our chests. The day was heavy, but our spirits were as light as ever. Snowboarding on that much powder can't be too dissimilar from flying; speed is the only tool fighting gravity. We were indeed, light. For those of not fortunate enough to experience Mt. Hood last Sunday, let me remind you of something that rang hollow only a year ago: it's only December!

Pumpkin Why?

Yes, the gluttony is over. Ssssssss...
My Thanksgiving went well -- at least much better than last year. Last year I was hobbling around from a serious bike injury to my leg. On top of that, there was enough personal life-drama for an OC episode (which I've heard is a popular television drama-O-rama...). This year there was no bike injury (save for the remaining scar...I mean "shark bite") and no drama. I cooked a couple delicious (I must say!) pumpkin pies and managed to sculpt some fresh whipped cream -- none of that Cool Whip B.S.! Ahh, pumpkin pie. The pumpkin pie, while a Thanksgiving cliche, is indeed a most delectable dessert. But why has the pumpkin been relegated to such infrequent and selected use? I suppose the fruit itself matures only under that harvest moon, limiting multi-seasonal use. And they look grotesque. I've seen some pumpkins that would make genital warts looks appetizing (sorry...). Sure there are the seeds, which are good but often caked in salt, and I've begun to see a couple pumpkin beers around that are actally to be pretty good (try the Blue Moon Pumpkin Ale). But come on! The pumpkin can make a killer pie...and that's it?! There's got to be other uses that rival the magic of the pie version. Pumpkin soup? -- actually I've had this and it wasn't good. Pumpkin bread? That sounds good. Caramelized pumpkin? Whoa, that sounds REALLY good. Pumpkin cake? Carrots are great in cake...I could think of these all night. I am beginning to wonder if a simple Google search would yield plenty of tasty recipes, some of which may even include a caramelized pumpkin. If so, American society needs to be informed. The pie needs to be evolved. I'll do my part for next year; I encourage you to join me. Mashed pumpkin and gravy, here we come!

KO

The pursuit of sleep; or rather, my lack of pursuit. I wish I didn't have to sleep. There are so many other things I would rather be doing, like writing blogs on sleep. I find it so interesting that human beings and most other animals need sleep. How could so many species evolve, yet maintain the need to be unconscious for 1/3 of their lives? I'm shocked that the animal that wasn't tired one night didn't eat all the animals that were tired, thereby dominating the evolutionary race. Now, I must confess my ignorance of the biology behind sleep and its evolution link. I'm sure good explanations exist. Maybe it isn't too dissimilar from the NRA's platform of "an armed society is a safe society:" as long as all animals are "armed" with the need for sleep, no animal can dominate. But think about how silly sleeping humans would appear to visiting aliens. There we are, just sprawled out with our mouth open making gurgling sounds, twitching our arms about like some sort of flagellum. And WE are the ones searching for intelligent life? I doubt science will eradicate the need for sleep in our lifetime, but trust me, they're working on it! If there are any group of people abhorring the need for sleep, it's scientists and medical doctors. In fact, there is a known positive correlation between the class ranking of a medical student and amphetamine abuse. Regardless, being unconscious seems to be so important that the intricacies of "why" will likely take decades to decipher. For example, rats that are deprived of sleep die after about two weeks. But die from what? Red eye? I haven't read the scientific papers with these details (assuming there are details), but evidently death is more likely to occur from not having sleep, than from being eaten by intergalactic hungry aliens.