Monday, January 17, 2011

Of ghosts and those pesky aliens

A business associate and I talked a bit during a breather taken in a grueling work session and for some reason the conversation ventured on the paranormal.

I am not one to take ghosts and extra-terrestrials seriously, which is why I was taken aback when he said that he believes in ghosts and extra-terrestrial life. It's not often that I have nothing to say, which he might have taken as a sign to continue and explain why he holds to a belief of the paranormal.

Apparently, an event occurred some time ago, he continued, where he and a friend who was with him, felt a hand touching them on their knees, while there was no one else in sight. One thing I wouldn't do is offer an explanation especially one that would discount his account of what they experienced. He was there, I wasn't. All I know is that, should there be such things as ghosts, which can interact with us, they would be spirits and exerting sufficient pressure on anything so that touch could be recognized would not be in the purview of a spirit. But, what do I know.

Without missing a beat he offered his explanation of his belief in extraterrestrial life. There are billions and billions of stars out there and each star is a sun with planets, he offered, and it is just not reasonable to believe that there wouldn't be life out there, some less advanced than what we are and some even more advanced. It is just that simple, he concluded, after relating a story told to him by a friend that a spaceship landed in Malibu a while ago. Why don't these folks have cameras with them when they need one?

I have heard the billions-and-billions theory before and, on the face of it, it sounds plausible. If plausibility could live with a few bedsores, that is. The millions of years between species, to explain the belief in Darwinism, came to mind. There always seems to be an inexplicable gap in which things "could have occurred" in the logic; the bedsore, if you will, in the plausibility reasoning.

Not to digress from the aliens from outer space monologue, the space and time continuum that holds the Darwin Theory together, fails to explain why -- if species evolved from other species producing more complex species by selective breeding -- there is not a single specimen of specie trapped in a fossil that is not a completely developed species. Surely, if selective breeding would cause, at first at least, a massive amount of life to be extinguished due to some failure or deficiency of the evolving species, having not yet adapted to the new conditions, some, no, perhaps one single fossil would have survived.

That's all too technical for me, anyway. A question closer to my pay grade is how was it possible for so many species to evolve male and female genders out of the same gene pool, so that a male and a female would be totally different and yet so similar that they are genetically compatible and arrive at the same place at the same time so that they can procreate. The place and time spoken of here are a few miles and a few days apart, miniscule dots on the timeline and geography proffered. The chances that a male and a female of each species that survived could get together at the exact viagra-moment without some outside intelligent planning and execution, just seems impossible.

It seems reasonable to believe, if the Theory is true, that the majority of these males and females would never have met to procreate causing millions of them to die off without offspring and leave fossils, somewhere, clearly showing their pre-evolved deficiencies until they got it right and took the next step on the evolution path. But, not one made it to stone.

Back to the billions and billions of stars and other people living somewhere else.

It's the same incomprehensible space and time continuum that's supposed to mold our reasoning to accept these chasms in their theory as truth. But, let's look at the probability that there is other life out there, somewhere, in spite of billions of stars with planets.

The earth is such a fine balancing act with exact temperatures, gaseous mixes, gravitational pull, sun distances from the earth, seasons, heat in the earth's inner core, oceans and their size, ocean temperatures and movement, atmospheric pressures, cross pollination of plants, different life forms that sustain one another as food, symbiosis, and other benefits, the exact earth's orbit around the sun, the earth's rotation, the wobble of its axis, and many other factors, that even if there were trillions of stars out there, the chances that all factors to sustain life would be present in their exact measure at the exact moment required in the exact amount, is almost impossible.

We talked a bit about other things for a while before getting back to work without me saying anything about this.

Afterwards, I thought I'd rather write about it, so that I don't get interrupted.

Saturday, January 8, 2011

Gabriella Giffords

As one gets older fewer things have shock value. The barbaric shooting of Gabriella Giffords -- while doing what we hope all congressmen would do -- and a number of other, innocent bystanders, did shock me deeply.

Regardless of her political views, she was an elected official, who of necessity will have a higher profile and perhaps even be in the crosshairs of nut jobs and other human debris found in any society. The assassination of politicians and other famous people is not unique to any particular society. In fact, millions of innocent people have died in the carnage that followed the loss of a single life taken by an assassin, as it was with the single shot that set the world aflame in 1914.

Hardly ever is an assassination inexpensive in shock-value, human suffering, and the psyche of a nation. That is true regardless of who is murdered. John Lennon's murder had the same effect, perhaps to a different degree, than that of John Kennedy, for example.

There are two differences, however, that I'd like to look at. When a murderer sets out to purely kill the victim, it takes one unexpected act and one bullet. The unexpected act gives the element of surprise, and the bullet finishes the job. That's how President Lincoln, President Kennedy, John Lennon and Lee Harvey Oswald were killed. There is very little one can do about these killers to prevent the killing.

There is, however, a much more deadly strain of killer which is what I want to talk about, and that's the killer who wants to kill as many people as possible, which is what the case was here with Jared Lee Loughner who shot up the "Congress on Your Corner" initiatives of Gabriella.

Consider when politicians, who are eligible for security protection, have been assailed. The perpetrator was, without fail, rapidly wrestled to the ground and disarmed or killed before too much damage could be done. When the perpetrator acted in a mostly unarmed environment, numerous innocent people are maimed or killed before the killer either runs out of ammo or someone manages to successfully intervene.

Jared "human trash" Loughner managed to shoot 18 people killing 6, according to information available on Saturday night. Who had the ability to stop the killing sooner and perhaps save the 9-year old girl's life or that of the judge, or the staffer who was a promising, responsible young man of 30?

I thought it was one of those weird coincidences that I'd read about Vermont's gun-carrying laws the same day that this shooting occurred. I didn't know that there is a law, or it was proposed (State Rep. Fred Maslack?) that a $500 fine be imposed on anyone not carrying a concealed weapon. The argument is that those who choose not to carry a firearm expect others to protect them and defend the State; a question mark is placed on their loyalty and honesty about living in Vermont. Now, there's a novel thought.

Let's lay that template over the shootings of today and see what transpires. I am sure if someone in the audience at Gabriella's meeting today was armed Jared would not have had a chance to fire off his third shot, perhaps not even his second, before someone realizing he's about to commit mass murder, blasted him away first, saving the lives, injury and trauma of many innocent others.

If soldiers in Fort Hood were allowed to carry their firearms while on campus, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan would not have been able to kill 12 and injure 31 others. It was a colossal breakdown of common sense that Hasan could take two pistols on campus and empty them out on unarmed, unsuspecting bystanders.

All the hand-wringing and psychological analyses that follow these tragedies could still take place, as they should but the number of innocent lives lost can be minimized by allowing people to defend themselves. In my opinion, these costs in human suffering must be accounted to someone and those who prohibit people from defending themselves should be strung up and shamed out of their positions of power.

Besides the fact that the Constitution is clear in the Second Amendment that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, common sense and history prove that where people carry arms as a matter of garb, crime rates are substantially lower than where the Constitution is violated; and where gun-control laws are instituted, crime rates go up at the expense of innocent lives. Why then, if higher crime means more innocent lives are lost or injured, like we have seen today, why would legislators and judges continue to bamboozle and bully the population into believing guns are evil while the opposite is true: gun ownership dispels crime? Or, worse still, why would people buy into this kind of abuse from law-makers and politicians?

Indications and early prognoses are that Gabriella Giffords would recover, it's too early to be sure, but I was pleasantly surprised to learn that she is an ardent promoter of an armed citizenry in obedience to the Second Amendment. I would venture a prediction that, should she fully recover, she could be instrumental in returning some of these hacks of people's rights to ordinary citizen status and get the government out of the way so that we are able to defend ourselves and our homeland.

They have the blood of these innocent folks on their hands and consciences.

Saturday, January 1, 2011

The New Year 2011

I thought I'd write a blog about 2010 and reminisce about the things that happened. It was not a good year for me financially; on the other hand it was an excellent year for so many other things.

I remember the turn in my business' economy when assignments started to flow again into my order book. The struggle to find business changed my perspective a little bit, too, giving that extra bit for a client. I guess that I would work harder and smarter and more courteous as a matter of habit now until I can hear and see the wow-factor. It should be an 'are you even real' type of response. That's when I've done my job.

Instead of earning a paycheck, I go to earn admiration, respect, and trust and then, once that has been accomplished, I earn my paycheck. Admiration because I am doing more than what was expected of me; respect because I am courteous, firm and make sure what I say is true and well thought out; trust because I am punctual and deliver on time and within budget. OK, that's what I strive for and so far my clients like that.

Last year also had a few high spots, such as my mom's 92nd birthday when we believed we won't see her again when we went to South Africa in 2008 to celebrate her 90th birthday. There was the election in November, which showed the people of the world that the people of this country don't take well to aristocracy and being told what to do by pseudo-noblemen. Especially not after they built this country into one of the wonders of the world in less than 200 years, or even 100 years if one considers where she was at the end of the 19th Century.

We left South Africa because I refused to live under a communist regime, which we knew was coming from far off already. A communist regime only restrained by a U.S. type constitution is still a communist regime and it will find ways to enslave its people and enrich its leaders, as is happening in South Africa now.

Having pulled up roots (at great cost and sacrifice to my family) from this Petri Dish of political change to seek out a place where the people, in the first and last instance, decide their fate, not politicians and not judges, I am rather sensitive to certain trends and what they lead to; trends to which Americans are mostly immune and prone to tolerate for far too long.

When people in power lead people in directions where they, without a doubt, are going to lose their liberty, prosperity and the peace of the nation, with words that falsely preach liberty, prosperity and the peace of the nation, my angst-level goes up exponentially. Trying the same thing that elsewhere led to communism doesn't mean the outcome here will be different. Perhaps more bloody, but not different, as I am sure some folks won't just roll over and play along when the liberties-list becomes shorter and shorter.

So, don't be confused about my angst over the trend of the politics in the U.S. that the people allowed to persist for so long. There is no other country where the people feature so prominently in their affairs and can bring about change even at the highest levels of government. This is the last bastion of peace, prosperity and liberty. There is empirical evidence of that. That personal liberty leads to peace and prosperity is axiomatic.

That is why the elections in November were such a great victory for the people. But, like any place where there is a lot of power, money, and opportunity, there is certainly plenty of opportunity for the drunken stupor of victory to allow impurities to cloud the principles of good governance. The confusion that is evident among those who wish to enslave our people is temporary. They will regroup and again prey on the people, like they always do.

There is a saying in sport, "dance with the one who brung you." That means, don't abandon the winning tactics that brought you to where you are just because you can see the end zone. We will only keep our leaders pure if we constantly hold them in the furnace of affliction. As soon as they are out of the fire they cool down and become cold and hardened.

The New Year holds a lot of opportunity as every new day does, we all know that, but I am suckered every year by the euphoria of the reminiscences of the past year contrasted with the celebrations and expectations of the new, which then turns out to be just another day.

Bummer, huh?

Have a great 2011 all of you. We have no idea what it holds for us unless we seize the day. Carpe Diem.

About Me

Seeking the truth until I find it.