The St. Patty's Day leprechaun came by our house the morning of March 17 and left us stockings. Luckily, it was a chilly morning, perfect for socks. I think this may be the start of a new tradition.
Monday, March 31, 2014
St. Patrick's Day 2014
The St. Patty's Day leprechaun came by our house the morning of March 17 and left us stockings. Luckily, it was a chilly morning, perfect for socks. I think this may be the start of a new tradition.
Friday, March 28, 2014
What You Aren't Being Told About Astronomy- Vol. II : My Thoughts
People will tell you that stars are so many millions or billions of light years away from the earth, and that is evidence that the Genesis record of creation can not be right. I'll grant that. But that is not the only evidence of the universe's history to be found in the stars. We need to look at the whole picture that science has drawn for us. It turns out that some astronomy data supports the creation model rather than the evolution model. I watched a DVD lecture from the Institute for Creation Research on this topic a little while ago. It's called What You Aren't Being Told About Astronomy- Vol. II.
He explains his points in simple, layman's language. If you're a 5th grader, or an adult who's not very scientifically-inclined, you'll be able to follow easily. It's not going to prepare you to have an intelligent conversation with an astrophysicist, but it might give you enough material to have a semi-intelligent conversation with another non-scientifically-inclined individual. What he had to say was encouraging to me, and I think other Christians who believe the historical record in the Bible would find it the same.
Here is a paraphrase of what he taught me.
Stars should not even exist. According to the evolutionary model of the origins of the universe, the Big Bang occurred when a tiny speck of extremely dense gas suddenly exploded. At first, the only thing in the universe was these gases, which later formed stars. There are two forces on gas molecules: gravity and gas pressure. Gas pressure disperses gas molecules, and in our scientific observation, gas pressure is always stronger than the gravity of gas molecules on each other. The only way to bring gas molecules together is to enclose them. Not many giant containers in space, are there?
There are five different theories that scientists have for the formation of stars. I can remember three right now...
Secular scientists now say that 96% of matter in the universe is either dark matter or dark energy. They don't know anything else about it, but they say that this unobservable stuff is responsible for the origin of stars.
There are not young galaxies where there should be. We are now able to look so deep into the universe with our telescopes that we can see galaxies that, according to the evolutionary model, we are observing as they were only 500 million years after the Big Bang. They are mature galaxies with many, many stars. The evolutionary model can hardly allow for more than a few stars to have formed by that time, much less entire galaxies. Even the galaxies that are a bit later, in the 3 to 6 billion year range, are too well-formed for their age.
Our sun is not a run-of-the-mill star; it is quite unique. It is in the 25% of stars that are NOT red dwarf stars. Red dwarf stars are smaller and much, much dimmer than the sun. The earth would need to orbit much more closely to the star, were it orbiting one of these, and only one side of the earth would face the star- all the time. Not good for life. Red dwarf stars have a lot of violent superflares; the sudden burst of heat would toast the earth in no time anyway.
Of the stars that are similar to the sun, most of them are in binary pairs or in a cluster of stars- again, not good for a planet's orbit. We have observed that stars in the same category as the sun have a superflare about once a century. Our sun is unusually stable and quiet. In addition, our sun's position in the galaxy protects it from drifting. If the chances of stars existing are basically null, then our star's odds are even less.
There is of course a Vol. I in this astronomy series, and I think they are working on a Vol. III. I hope to watch both sometime.
So evidence for the origins of the universe is conflicting. What are we supposed to make of that? It just means that there is more information left for us to uncover. We're misunderstanding something still- probably lots of things. Because we're just little people, and we haven't been studying this for very long. I for one am going to stick with the creation model, which has not only some scientific data but also a historical document on its side.
He explains his points in simple, layman's language. If you're a 5th grader, or an adult who's not very scientifically-inclined, you'll be able to follow easily. It's not going to prepare you to have an intelligent conversation with an astrophysicist, but it might give you enough material to have a semi-intelligent conversation with another non-scientifically-inclined individual. What he had to say was encouraging to me, and I think other Christians who believe the historical record in the Bible would find it the same.
Here is a paraphrase of what he taught me.
Stars should not even exist. According to the evolutionary model of the origins of the universe, the Big Bang occurred when a tiny speck of extremely dense gas suddenly exploded. At first, the only thing in the universe was these gases, which later formed stars. There are two forces on gas molecules: gravity and gas pressure. Gas pressure disperses gas molecules, and in our scientific observation, gas pressure is always stronger than the gravity of gas molecules on each other. The only way to bring gas molecules together is to enclose them. Not many giant containers in space, are there?
There are five different theories that scientists have for the formation of stars. I can remember three right now...
- Two stars collide.
- A supernova occurs.
- A black hole.
Secular scientists now say that 96% of matter in the universe is either dark matter or dark energy. They don't know anything else about it, but they say that this unobservable stuff is responsible for the origin of stars.
There are not young galaxies where there should be. We are now able to look so deep into the universe with our telescopes that we can see galaxies that, according to the evolutionary model, we are observing as they were only 500 million years after the Big Bang. They are mature galaxies with many, many stars. The evolutionary model can hardly allow for more than a few stars to have formed by that time, much less entire galaxies. Even the galaxies that are a bit later, in the 3 to 6 billion year range, are too well-formed for their age.
Our sun is not a run-of-the-mill star; it is quite unique. It is in the 25% of stars that are NOT red dwarf stars. Red dwarf stars are smaller and much, much dimmer than the sun. The earth would need to orbit much more closely to the star, were it orbiting one of these, and only one side of the earth would face the star- all the time. Not good for life. Red dwarf stars have a lot of violent superflares; the sudden burst of heat would toast the earth in no time anyway.
Of the stars that are similar to the sun, most of them are in binary pairs or in a cluster of stars- again, not good for a planet's orbit. We have observed that stars in the same category as the sun have a superflare about once a century. Our sun is unusually stable and quiet. In addition, our sun's position in the galaxy protects it from drifting. If the chances of stars existing are basically null, then our star's odds are even less.
There is of course a Vol. I in this astronomy series, and I think they are working on a Vol. III. I hope to watch both sometime.
So evidence for the origins of the universe is conflicting. What are we supposed to make of that? It just means that there is more information left for us to uncover. We're misunderstanding something still- probably lots of things. Because we're just little people, and we haven't been studying this for very long. I for one am going to stick with the creation model, which has not only some scientific data but also a historical document on its side.
Wednesday, March 26, 2014
Books I Would Read (and Pay Good Money For) If Only Someone Else Would Write Them
Historical Fiction
Spirituality
- Through Fire and Through Water. Tells the story of the worldwide flood and the rebuilding of the new world from the eyes of one of Noah's daughters-in-law. She grew up in a dangerous, evil culture, lost her family and all she knew, witnessed horrendous destruction as well as mercy, lived with her in-laws for a year on a boat, saw God make and keep His promises, and started a family in a wild environment without the technology or comfort of her former life.
- Alien. The experience of one of the first Jewish converts to Christianity. What was it like to be part of the fledgling Christian community that gathered in the Jerusalem Temple every day? Who shared meals together and had everything in common? Who didn't yet have the New Testament or centuries of other believers who had gone before them? Who were persecuted and dispersed around the world?
- Be the Introvert You Were Meant to Be. Topics include how to perfect the introvert's unique strengths, how to respond to situations and people in the way that you were meant to, how to overcome the introvert's weaknesses, and how to recognize situations in which you should try to be more extroverted.
- The Time Budget. Teaches you to track your time the way you would your money, use your time efficiently, savor the time you get to spend, form the habits you want, and beat procrastination and laziness.
Spirituality
- Confessions of a Socially Awkward Christian: How I Learned to Have Real Fellowship with Other Believers, Use My Spiritual Gifts, and Be a Witness to a Dying World With the Personality God Gave Me
- In, Not Of. Discusses what innocence and holiness should look like in a Christian. What does it mean to be shrewd as a serpent, innocent as a dove? How it is possible to have real conversations with others who are used to "coarse jesting," "silly talk," or mentioning disgraceful things (Ephesians 5)? How do you do what is right without judging or seeming to judge others?
- Twenty-Something and Debt-Free. For those who have never had and never want debt. Includes chapters on paying your way through college, starting a promising career without a college degree, prioritizing your needs and developing saving strategies for multiple large consumer purchases when you don't make a lot of money, getting an apartment without a credit score, buying your first home debt free, planning for emergencies and health care, knowing when and how much to start saving for retirement, finding your Mr. or Miss Right who agrees with you on finances (or how to win them over), and deciding when you have the money to start a family.
- The Good Girl's Guide to Fashion History. For each period of history and every recent decade, asks, "Who were the good girls and what were they up to? What did they wear and why? What kinds of clothing did their contemporaries consider modest? How can we be inspired by them?"
- Style Forever. Tips for women of every age from the teen years on up. Introduces you to the basic clothing items you should have at each age, and how to style them as your life changes. Takes you on a journey through recent fashion history to show you how you could have worn your basics in different ways as the seasons and trends changed. Teaches you how to find investment pieces that are interesting but versatile and timeless. Shows you how to mix and match your clothes so that your outfits are complimentary and balanced. Encourages you to find your signature style and think of your closet as a fashion collection.
Friday, March 21, 2014
Andrea's "Two-two" Birthday
We ate lots of chicken quesadillas and sweet 'n sour chicken. Then we dumped out every craft supply we owned and had a big crafting spree. I am surrounded by talented people.
Wednesday, March 19, 2014
Two More Books and My Thoughts
Most parts of Highland Sanctuary by Jennifer Hudson Taylor are like a transcript of a girlish daydream, but in unusual circumstances. It's about a beautiful young Scottish woman in the 1400s who suffers from seizures. Serena lives in constant fear of having a seizure in public, which would inevitably end in her being tried and burned as a witch. She stays in the Village of Outcasts with other people who have various physical conditions, and she doesn't trust anyone outside her village. Two noblemen (Iain, the new lord, and Gavlin, a lord from southern Scotland who is there to lead the reconstruction of Iain's castle) are intrigued by her mysteriousness, and both fall in love with her. Serena guards her heart at first, knowing that no relationship can end well. When her secrets are made known and her life is in danger, Serena may have to learn to rely on someone else. And one of these men may stand by her side and prove himself.
This story followed a well-worn romantic plotline. Clearly, this sort of emotional manipulation works on women. It's obvious from the beginning that Serena will marry and who her man will be; with romance novels it always seems to be that way. It also always seems to be the case in romance novels that the woman is stand-offish at first, while the man is in love at first sight. Meaning that not only does he think she is the most beautiful woman he has ever met, but he immediately decides that he will have no one else forever and ever. This is so twisted. Yes, faithful for life is the ideal, and I think Christian authors should uphold that ideal in their literature, but mixing it with the fairy-tale of love at first sight (i.e. lust at first sight) is not a good idea, not in terms of morals, and not in terms of a plot. I'm waiting for a book in which the man keeps his attraction in check and comes to love a woman slowly. I don't have much personal experience, but when the hero is supposed to be a good man and we are supposed to believe the relationship is long-lasting, a process in his heart and mind seems more realistic.
Now in reality, we girls sometimes get infatuated with a man we just saw. A literary role model who can control her heart is a wonderful thing, but Serena doesn't really fit the bill there either. She rejects Gavlin at first because of her own insecurity. However, since that is a real response that a lot of girls have, she doesn't bother me as much as the male characters do.
I saw one more emotional issue. Serena's mother dies in her place, leaving Serena with no one in the world except the man who loved her. It at once seems so perfect and so wrong that he becomes her entire world all of a sudden.
To be terribly honest, the endorphins had their effect on me, and I enjoyed this book anyway. I'm trying to tell myself that it's because the secondary plot surrounding the characters' daily lives and the circumstances threatening them was original and much more suspenseful... but we know the truth...
Although I've never seen an Indy film, I've read one. Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is basically a word-for-word copy of the movie script in paragraph form (guessing from movie quotes that I saw online) filled in with colorful descriptions of the settings and non-stop action sequences. The writing is done so skillfully that I think I have a pretty accurate mental picture of what the movie looks like. At first, I enjoyed the adventure and mystery, but eventually the action became numbing. It's so odd that stunts and collisions and disasters that look perfectly credible on the screen sound ridiculous on paper- and then they get boring. The crystal skulls themselves were a disappointment to me (aliens from another universe?) Somewhere in the last third of the book, the entire world that the book had constructed for me collapsed, and I just read it for the sake of finishing.
Monday, March 17, 2014
True Stories About What Happens When You Look Much Younger Than You Really Are
About two years ago...
Cashier: (after I accidentally enter the wrong PIN for my debit card) Is it your card or Mom's?
Me: It's mine. I forgot that I just changed my PIN and I put in the old one.
Cashier: Evil question. How old are you?
Me: 21, almost 22.
Cashier: You don't look a day past 15.
About one year ago...
Cashier: (when I approach the register with a can of spray paint) Are you 21? You need to be 21 to buy spray paint.
Me: I'm 22.
Cashier: May I check your driver license? (I give it to her. She studies it.) Born in 1990.... (turning to other cashier... apparently she can't do math) If she was born in 1990, how old would that make her now?
Other cashier: 22.
First cashier: Studies my license for several more seconds before ringing me up.
Last fall...
Craft store employee: (when my sister and I had laid out the things we were planning to BUY on the pattern book table) Are you going to put all that away?
All the time...
Countless People: What grade are you in?
Two weeks ago when I went to vote...
Woman volunteering at the desk: Why, you look like a little child!
A ton of scathing retorts come to my mind... usually seconds, minutes or hours too late to use them. Which is probably for the best. I certainly don't need an arrest when I'm trying to exercise my right to vote.
I've said my share of really stupid things to people too. Worse, much worse, than that someone looks like a little child. Sometimes the words I choose are clumsy and aren't what I really think. Sometimes they are what I really think, and I realize later- sometimes just a split- second later- that that wasn't the best thing to say. There have been times when I've come home from work or somewhere else, and scenes from the day come back to my mind, and I realize how horrible some of the things I said must have sounded to others. And I feel really bad.
I wonder how many times I've insulted, disrespected, or hurt someone else, and never ever realized it?
I've received so much grace already in my life. I want to be someone who's always ready to give grace too.
Cashier: (after I accidentally enter the wrong PIN for my debit card) Is it your card or Mom's?
Me: It's mine. I forgot that I just changed my PIN and I put in the old one.
Cashier: Evil question. How old are you?
Me: 21, almost 22.
Cashier: You don't look a day past 15.
About one year ago...
Cashier: (when I approach the register with a can of spray paint) Are you 21? You need to be 21 to buy spray paint.
Me: I'm 22.
Cashier: May I check your driver license? (I give it to her. She studies it.) Born in 1990.... (turning to other cashier... apparently she can't do math) If she was born in 1990, how old would that make her now?
Other cashier: 22.
First cashier: Studies my license for several more seconds before ringing me up.
Last fall...
Craft store employee: (when my sister and I had laid out the things we were planning to BUY on the pattern book table) Are you going to put all that away?
All the time...
Countless People: What grade are you in?
Two weeks ago when I went to vote...
Woman volunteering at the desk: Why, you look like a little child!
A ton of scathing retorts come to my mind... usually seconds, minutes or hours too late to use them. Which is probably for the best. I certainly don't need an arrest when I'm trying to exercise my right to vote.
I've said my share of really stupid things to people too. Worse, much worse, than that someone looks like a little child. Sometimes the words I choose are clumsy and aren't what I really think. Sometimes they are what I really think, and I realize later- sometimes just a split- second later- that that wasn't the best thing to say. There have been times when I've come home from work or somewhere else, and scenes from the day come back to my mind, and I realize how horrible some of the things I said must have sounded to others. And I feel really bad.
I wonder how many times I've insulted, disrespected, or hurt someone else, and never ever realized it?
I've received so much grace already in my life. I want to be someone who's always ready to give grace too.
Friday, March 7, 2014
Kayley's 17th
Rather than give her presents for her 17th birthday, Kayley asked us to donate to some families who are trying to raise enough money to pay the international adoption fees so that they can take their children home. She told us there are things she wants, but she said these families and children would appreciate the money much more than she would.
On her birthday we watched The Penny and ate breakfast for dinner- stuffed omelets jam-packed with cheese and mushrooms and veggies, bacon with maple syrup, fresh strawberries, and cranberry scones. Kayley baked the cake (it was some sort of chunky fruit and nut cake but not like the heavy, old-fashioned "fruitcake") and Mama decorated it. We ate it alongside Andrea's homemade banana ice cream.
Monday, March 3, 2014
Watership Down: My Thoughts
Watership Down is an animated feature film about a group of rabbits who escape an oppressive society with a dictator-like chief and start their own colony in freedom. (It's also a novel, but I haven't read the book). Although it's appropriate for children, adults would like it more. You'd think a movie about talking animals would be silly and juvenile, but no. There are only a few comic moments; it's pretty serious. The animation is lovely. This was the era of hand-drawn animation; it has all the charm of classic Disney animation but everything, particularly the scenery, looks more natural.
Basics:
Title: Watership Down
Year: 1978
Rating: PG
Setting: 20th century English countryside
Main Characters:
Fiver: respected prophet
Hazel: Fiver's brother, well-spoken natural leader
Bigwig: the chief's former guard, brave and tough
Plot:
Fiver sees an alarming vision in which the fields surrounding his warren are covered in blood (He doesn't know it, but the land is going to be developed soon). He tells his brother, who believes him, and together they warn the other rabbits of impending danger. They go to the chief to warn him and to suggest that they move the warren, but the chief doesn't listen. Fiver, Hazel, and a few other rabbits who trust Fiver, sneak away that very night. They then take a long, perilous journey full of narrow escapes from predators, other wild rabbits who try to lure them into human snares, and even one death (She's the only girl rabbit who went along and she's snatched up by a hawk). Hazel and Fiver don't have an exact destination in mind, and the hardships almost cause the other rabbits to turn back. Then they meet a lone rabbit from their old warren who tells them about all the horrors that happened back home when their burrows were destroyed. Eventually, they establish a new warren safe in the hills. Their only problem is that they have no does, so they head for a neighboring warren, Ephrathah, which is infamous for punishing its dissenters harshly. Bigwig infiltrates the warren, where he gains a place in the guard. Then one evening he leads all the rabbits there who want to escape, including several does, to freedom. The General and some of his fiercest guards pursue them. There is a scuffle, but they get away that time, only for their enemy to attack after they've safely reached their warren. The rabbits rely on their cunning and the lessons they've learned from previous dangers they've encountered to defeat the General and live in peace.
Themes:
Good citizens are united with their community rather than submissive to an authority. All of the authority figures in the film are dictators who refuse to let anyone leave the warren, order the secret police to watch anyone they suspect of not being completely submissive, and torture anyone caught escaping. In short, they aren't worthy of their citizens' respect, and to submit to them is shameful. Their only concern appears to be their own power. Despite being a lowly animal of prey in the big scheme of things, the chief of the rabbits' original warren is aloof and out of touch, never coming above ground or mingling with his subjects. He doesn't care at all that danger might threaten his tribe. Clearly, he can not keep them safe. Later on, Hazel is sometimes referred to as "chief" because he makes the difficult decisions and motivates others to do the right thing, but he never seems to have asked for the title. He constantly reminds everyone to stay together. When someone leaves the group is when trouble happens.
The greatest enemy of a downtrodden group is actually their own kind- or those on the top. There is no doubt larger predators exist; they briefly encounter wild beasts in the dark, dogs, cats, hawks, hunters and of course developers. At one point a character asks why the humans hate them, and another rabbit responds (I'm paraphrasing) :"The humans don't hate us; we're just in their way." The treatment they get from their own chief or the General is more akin to hate.
The weak and oppressed are not helpless against aggressors. They have their own strengths- "cunning" is the one this story focuses on- but they need to use some initiative, not just take the suffering passively. The rabbits who don't try to run away die in the tunnels as the land is bulldozed. Ephrathah contains several "troublemakers" who have tried to escape but have been caught and tortured and then given up hope. Hazel and his group, on the other hand, make plans ahead of time and persevere through setbacks. (Their raid on Ephrathah is not their first attempt at rescuing does from captivity; they try to release some does who are being kept on a farm, but that is unsuccessful.) They make alliances (with an injured bird they nurse back to health) and learn from previous scares and failures, (such as the time they narrowly escape from a dog by jumping on a raft).
While watching this film, I kept picking up on similarities to the Israelites journey from Egypt to the promised land. Besides the obvious bondage to freedom/death to life tale, there was the brother who served as the spokesman, the predicament of being trapped between an enemy and a body of water and crossing the water to escape, deceitful neighbors, and grumbling followers who want to turn back. Perhaps a coincidence, but interesting.
The filmmakers don't seem to be promoting an agenda. These themes subtly rise to the surface in the storyline and were probably unintentional on the part of the filmmakers. It's just a feel-good underdog story.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)