CLICK HERE FOR BLOGGER TEMPLATES AND MYSPACE LAYOUTS »

Waiting For Superman

My Journal

2/15/14


Today I don't want to be introspective. I want to just be superficial, which is kind of different for me, not in an arrogant way, just in a factual way. I thought it was interesting when I read an article about a guy who decided to follow Ben Franklin's schedule for a day. Ben left time for study and to deal with spiritual things. The author said he almost never did that, and it was an interesting thing for him to do. Thinking about big things like God and purpose and why we are here and doing research into those questions is something I grew up doing and something I do all the time. How can you not wonder about that? How can you just go through life and just go to work, come home, be with your someone, party sometimes and that is it. That is satisfying? Really? Don't you wonder about things as a whole? Don't you wonder why we are here or how, or do you just take science's or God's word for it and leave it at that. I guess in a way you could have more of your emotional energy available to fritter away on personal drama. That might be interesting. I know it is kind of a weight on me to wonder about my, and our purpose, to wonder what or who else is out there, and it is a huge itch I am just dying to scratch to see everything as it really is. I used to think I would just go to heaven and God would explain it all to me and I could live with that. Now I am not so sure I will ever know, and ugh, that is annoying.

But to live without that burden, to me is to live in a closet. To live in the small world of what I see now. I just need to get out into the air and breath and wonder, and make wild guesses and hope. So with that comes the burden of what I don't know, of making choices and just not knowing if they are the right ones because I can't have all the information. I can't see past death or into the new millennium, so I have to make some of my best guesses blind.
Showing posts with label science. Show all posts
Showing posts with label science. Show all posts

Saturday, July 21, 2012

Global Warming and the state of Earth Improvement

I have been looking into global warming a bit lately. It was spawned by the random act of checking out "What's the Worst that Could Happen?" by Greg Craven. He is not an expert, but he plays one in the high school science classes he teaches. He wrote this book to help people think more objectively about, not who is right and wrong, but whether we should take action or not. He is obviously under the opinion that taking massive action immediately is the right way to go. I didn't find his book particularly helpful, but I would agree with one of his thoughts. The truth about what global warming is, how it works, and most of all what it will do to us in the future is not nearly as important as the actions we take or don't take. What I mean is that finding an alternative to using gas in cars is a good thing no matter why you are doing it. Trying to watch and clean what our power plants are spewing into the atmosphere can only be good,  and looking into a variety of types of power sources can only be better for our future. Freaking out and rushing changes onto the likely causes of CO2 emissions may do more harm than good if our alternatives use more energy, or loads of money. 


My first reaction to the whole thing is a natural skepticism. There is money on one side and politics on the other, neither of which I trust, and in some instances those are both on both sides. I also find myself a bit at odds with some environmentalists. I know they mean well most of the time, but my natural bent is to help people, not plants. In this case they would probably say that planting more trees would help us all. From the little research I have done it looks like what would help the most is if everyone in the world would give up their cars, and electricity, and even then it would only be about half of the cut in CO2 we would need to return to pre-warming temperatures. I am not ready pretend the industrial revolution never happened and return to pioneer days yet. 

There are many things about this issue that are very tricky. I have heard that the best way to actively push for the measures we need to combat future global warming is to lobby governent. The slow, plodding, bipartisan government. I know that most of the government is aware of the environmental lobby, and reacts to them when it needs to to maintain their votes, but I worry about the reliability of the outcome. And I personally am not a big fan of bigger government. Ok, so let's take global warming to the personal level. What can I do other than vote and annoy my congress person? It seems that it is hard to move in the right direction without moving in the wrong direction in another area, very likely canceling out the good I did. Like maybe I grow a good bit of my own food, therefore lowering CO2 that would have come from the trucks delivering vegetables to the grocery store, but then I own an SUV. Or maybe I try my best to eat organic, and not eat meat, to help eliminate methane and such, but then I love to take long trips to cool destinations in my car. And then there is me. I try to buy local at the farmers market, which helps reduce CO2 emissions from long deliveries, and I use florescent bulbs, but I shop at Walmart and use plastic bags and disposable diapers. I am sure not helping things. I do try to re-use my Walmart bags for other things, but that really isn't an excuse. I do adopt children rather than put more people on the earth, but I did up the population by three personally. I just can't win. So if all of us are doing things like composting, but yet driving an old car that doesn't have very modern exhaust upgrades, how much are any of us going to help? It sure doesn't seem like it will amount to much, and I think a lot of people who know alot about climate change agree. That is why we come back to government, because power companies aren't going to fix themselves, right. Lately I have been rather scared by the realization of how much the government actually funds in this country. Almost all of science can trace at least part of it's money back to the government, (which, again, I don't trust). So where does that leave us. It seems to me that we have a tangled web that is extremely hard to navigate, and vulnerable to the whim of popular opinion. 

So what about global warming. It does seem to be warming. Are we causing it. Possibly, probably, in part, who knows. I don't. I think we know too little about the long history of the earth to truly be able to fathom what is going on here. What should we do? What we have been doing. Let's try to pollute less. Let's try to make the energy we use more efficient, and develop cleaner sources of it. Let's think outside of the box. I like the oddball ideas I have read about like capturing this excess carbon in the atmosphere and re-useing it for energy. I even read an idea that involved deploying giant mirrors into orbit to deflect some heat from the sun. Sure, these ideas may be crazy and may not work, but they may lead us to ideas and ways of thinking that will. Let's not get hung up on specifics, and not get caught up in angry debates. there are a lot of things that neither side knows for sure. But I think we know enough to be grateful for what we have, and know that we can't just coast along doing whatever we want to our planet and think things will always be fine. I for one will probably keep buying local, and then turning around and buying Walmart. I will vote for the guy that I think represents my views on most issues in general, but I probably won't annoy him for much. Maybe a midwife issue here, an adoption issue there. Things that affect my immediate family, just like most people. I won't give up my car, but I will try not to make extra trips, or long trips if I don't feel I have to. Will government and power companies and car companies do what I need them to do with out my hand at their wheel? I don't know. I don't even know exactly what I would ask them for if I could, because I don't know the difficulties behind making less polluting cars work, and then making them at a price I am willing to pay. Though I would be happy to buy an environmentally friendly mini-van if I could afford it next time. I will just send out my hope, that if we are contributing we can figure out what we can do to help before it is too late. The other thing I realize is that the world was not specifically made to accommodate me. There very likely could come a catastrophe to humans that we didn't cause, or didn't cause completely. We have been very lucky up until this point. The earth has been through many time periods that would not have been so comfortable for us, and may go through more. There is no law saying the universe must be nice to us, unless there is, and that would lead to an entirely different understanding of the universe to debate. 

Sunday, February 12, 2012

Twins and My Dilemma


?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"? ?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"? So I am facing a philosophical existential dilemma. I just got done reading a book about twins and what twin studies tell us about who we are. Basically the crux being that we are what our genes predetermine us to be. When I tell Todd I fell outmoded he rolls his eyes and makes some comment about it not being that simple. I am sure he is right, but that doesn't ease my angst. Right now I am drowning in toddler. I am up to my eyeballs in developmental milestones and getting my kids to survive long enough to reach them. I have chosen to educate my kids myself because I think it will make a difference to who they turn out to be and to the world they touch.

The twin studies indicate that there is a measurable difference attributable to environment when kids are younger, but that by the time they are adults that difference has faded. They look at separated twins and how much they and their little quirks are alike when they meet as adults.

The book makes what sounds to me to be excuses as to why eugenics should not be allowed following this type of conclusion, but they seem weak and fanciful to me. After this book Aldous Huxley's world sounds like it may be the proper alternative for the human race.

Here is the thing that gets me. I think I am me. I think I make decisions that alter my life. I think I make decisions that alter my kids lives, but what if all that is just a delusion? It seems that more and more neuroscience is pointing to how much we are in bondage to our caveman brains. And when you really think about it, and look at life in those terms it can be completely understandable. Twin studies tell me that if I met my twin right now it is highly likely that our lives would be incredibly similar no matter how we were raised. The exception to this being that they have found twins tend to marry dissimilar spouses. But she would probably run, raise her own kids, be insatiably curious, volunteer, and in general try to help those she felt worthy of it, and of course she would look like me. The book said, don't feel bad that you are not original, twins say that the relationship they have with each other is very close and satisfying.

But where does that leave me, as a mom, and us as humans? How have the changes occurred that made us not cavemen, and how can we change the future? What if survival of the fittest is the proper path for humans and we should abandon all efforts for life extension and alleviation of poverty? It is easy, because we are so used to caring about these topics to dismiss the idea that they don't matter, but what if it is true? What if we are just cogs in a machine? Why should we believe the delusion that we should strive, the placebo that our life matters?

I am still planning on getting out of bed. I am still planning on raising my children the way my instinct says I should. But I am feeling a serious vacuum as to why. Obviously, I have a lot to discover.


This is the accursed, but interesting, book586573.jpg.jpeg

Wednesday, November 2, 2011

Environmentalism as Religion




I love Earth. I think it is a great place to live, especially since I don't know of any other "Class M" planets within a reasonable distance to compare it to if I wanted to escape it. In reality though, I have as cushy a life as I could ask for, and I would love to ensure the same for my children and theirs. So I do care about the environment in the sense that I don't prefer worldwide annihilation within the next few generations. I teach my kids to pick up their trash. We have changed to compact fluorescent bulbs. We fill up the recycle bin. We re-use paper. Taking care of the earth is very nice at that involvement level. Many people worldwide however, have turned environmentalism into something entirely different, however. It would mean little to me if this only affected random far-spread cults. I see this belief system in people I meet daily, however, and I think that this perspective on environmental issues can hurt the earth, and science as a whole. The problem is clearly laid out in Michael Crichton's video, and also in this article by Robert Nelson, and this short blurb from the New York Times

My main point against environmentalism as religion is this: to truly solve a problem as complex as helping the earth to stay clean and life-supporting, we need to be able to pursue solutions that are truly beneficial in every aspect. In its present state, the environmental, sustainable movement, is so ensnarled in popular opinion, politics, and merchandising, that no one can get a clear idea of what is truly helping and what is hurting. Politicians say the right environmental thing so special interest groups will continue to fund them. Grocery stores and construction companies continue to sell high priced alternative items that say they are good for the environment, and people continue to ease their conscience by sacrificing a bit of extra money for what they consider to be the greater good. Maybe they are better for the environment. Where money is involved how can we know for sure? How environmentally conscious a person is has become an easy measure of their value in society. The problem becomes very apparent when huge amounts of money are sunk into technologies that are lovely in theory, but amount to crap in real life. I absolutely think we should be thinking about alternatives to all the fuel we consume, but if solar power in its present state is not a viable alternative we should be allowed to acknowledge that. If we are better off as far as money, pollution and waste is concerned, throwing plastic bottles in a landfill rather than trying to recycle them, or deluding the public into thinking they are being recycled, the environmental religion will not allow us to say so, lest we be black balled and proclaimed planet-haters or something. For science to work well: for real advancements to be made, we must be allowed to speak the truth. We must be allowed to be creative and think of things that would truly help on all levels. I think buying fewer plastic bottles, especially water bottles, would absolutely help the environment on most levels. Recycling them after I use them? I don't know if it is truly viable. Solar power, wind power, hydro power, these are all very nice thoughts, and they are all very good ideas, and in certain circumstances, like Hoover Dam, for instance, they work very well, but for these great ideas to be brought about into truly useful technologies we must be able to be honest. Solar and wind power are really in their infancy, and a lot of work will need to go into making them truly useful on the large scale. Possibly so much work that we would be better off trying to make the electronic devices we use more efficient first.

The truth is at stake if we believe every banana peel we put in the compost bin will save the earth. The truth is what will lead to real solutions, and no dogmatic, organized, unquestioning group of people will ever be able to absorb the sometimes messy, unbecoming, contradictory things that surface when one truly wants to know the truth. No religion likes too many questions, and without hard questions we won't get real answers.

Tuesday, July 19, 2011

Longevity and my two cents

Many of my friends are very interested in things like eating organic, and having fewer pesticides and chemicals in the things they eat. There is a certain amount of emphasis put on being as natural as possible, basically reverting to the eating of previous generations. There are also other things involved in their eating decisions, such as the treatment of animals, and the environment. I think it is great for them to get satisfaction from these endeavors. In the bit of research I have done, however, eating healthy is just one of many factors that lead to a good quality of life, and longevity. Another major factor is obesity. Unfortunately, many of these same friends are overweight. Statistically speaking they would be better off doing whatever they had to to get their weight in a normal range. That would very likely indicate a diet high in fruits and vegetables, which they are already pros at, but also exercise. This is another activity that I see very little emphasis on in the healthy eating community. Another big contributing factor to longevity is stress management. Exercise helps control stress. Vital relationships and time out with friends also plays a role in longevity, probably because of it's tie to relieving stress. Interestingly, I have friends who have really never left their children since they were born years ago. I understand that children are wonderful, and I love mine, but at the same time I find that when I am around them my mind is constantly estimating the likelihood of them falling into catastrophic danger. When I am away from them and I know they are with a trusted grown-up I can concentrate on only one thing, which is just plain less energy consuming. There is a bit of a release in just being responsible for me, and there is also a bit of a self-confidence boost as I remind myself of the other parts of me that are interesting and valuable. There are actually very few friends I can count on to leave their families to foster strong friendships. I understand that all of my friends may not choose to spend their kidless social time with me (I do have a big mouth at times, after all) but I see little evidence that my mom friends are doing it elsewhere.
If raising chickens is a relaxing activity for you, and it contributes to your happiness, and self-satisfaction, then more power to you. The same goes for gardening. Some may say that I am deriding these activities because I don't like doing them and they are not relaxing for me, and that would be completely true. I don't like to garden. I don't want pets or chickens. So yes, I am easing my conscience, but at the same time, I don't see evidence that spending the extra time and money on doing these activities only because the products are more natural will make an appreciable difference in the quality of my life or longevity, especially if I am doing well on a variety of other planes. I exercise regularly, spend time with friends, do my best to relax and appreciate life, have regular sex (another key to longevity, for a variety of reasons). I have a lot of energy and I am completely healthy as far as I and any recent doctor visits can ascertain.
This leaves me with the strongest known factor in the determination of longevity. Genetics. Studies have shown that the length of your parents and grandparents lives is the most consistent determining factor in how long you will live. I have a grandma who will be 99 this year. "Go Grandma!" When I am interrogating my future sons and daughters in law I will make sure to find out how old their grandparents are (JK). Scientists are feverishly working on how to alter and enhance our DNA to make sure we all have the chance to endure a few more years of sitting in a wheelchair being offered a cookie in return for a smile, (like my Grandma) . Your next best bet for life extension after genetics is a calorie restrictive diet. It is another of the few scientifically proven ways of extending lifespan. You can find out more about that here. Notice that little mention is made of what those calories should consist of, though I believe a more-or-less balanced diet is assumed.
In short, I think agonizing over food choices is not the complete story when it comes to having a good and active life. I think running over to pick up that extra box of food from a local organic co-op may be better spent going for a jog, or spending an hour talking to a friend over lunch without kids, (even friends with big mouths and dissenting opinions). Being healthy will always be important. Mainstream media or even mainstream science will never have all of the facts about the food we eat, and what is truly the best for us, especially if those facts are not favorable to big business or big pharmaceuticals. But I also think it is flawed thinking to put all of the burden on advances in food production when it comes to lowering our quality of life. After all, lifespan is vastly longer now than it was in the time when we didn't have pesticides and relied on raw milk.


I had fun watching this entire video so feel free to watch the rest of it at PBS.

Watch the full episode. See more NOVA scienceNOW.




Here are some more links I found interesting:

Longevity and Genes

101 Ways to Increase Longevity and Quality of Life

100 Year Olds are as Unhealthy as the Rest of Us

Longevity and Aging

I also found a lot of great information in Merchants of Immortality