Archive for Miscellaneous

Good news and bad news

Bad news: The $9 worth of faucets I bought to fix my leaky washer hookup weren’t the right type.
Good news: With a little tinkering everything’s fine and dandy thanks to 2 wrenches and 3 cents worth of Teflon tape.
Back to Lowe’s you go, unneeded faucets!

Things I learned last week:

1) Louisianans seem to think their 100% humidity is much more humid than Ohio’s 100% humidity.
2) Hand Grenades® are darn tasty.
3) People get very friendly when you tell them you drove 900 miles to help repair their town.
4) A clothes dryer plugged into an improperly grounded 220 volt outlet can be a little tingly.

Inquisitive little buggers…

The old ladies were awfully inquisitive at the church garage sale tonight.
Them: “What are you going to do with that rack/shelf?”
Me: “I don’t know, put it somewhere and put stuff on it…”
5 minutes later…
Them: “I’m curious, what are you going to do with that basket?”
Me: “Ummmm… put it on the shelf and put stuff in it…”

*forehead slap* Idiot!

Decrypt the folder on your hard disk BEFORE you upgrade your computer and reinstall Windows. BEFORE!!!

Overheard in the video store

What follows is a conversation overhead yesterday in the video store between a father and his son, who appeared to be about 8.

Son: *Looks at DVD box, reads title* “Carnival.”
Father: “Read that again.”
Son: “Car.. Carb… Cannibal.”
Father: “Yeah, that means ‘meat eater’.”
Son: *~10 seconds go by* “Another word for that is ‘carnivore’.”
Father: “Oh, I guess that actually means ‘one who eats their own’.”
Father: *~15 seconds go by* “You know, once at a job site I was working at we had a guy who was arrested and taken away for cannibalism.”
Father: *~10 seconds go by* “But that wasn’t in America.”

Co-founder of Greenpeace: Nuclear power is good

In the early 1970s when I helped found Greenpeace, I believed that nuclear energy was synonymous with nuclear holocaust, as did most of my compatriots. That’s the conviction that inspired Greenpeace’s first voyage up the spectacular rocky northwest coast to protest the testing of U.S. hydrogen bombs in Alaska’s Aleutian Islands. Thirty years on, my views have changed, and the rest of the environmental movement needs to update its views, too, because nuclear energy may just be the energy source that can save our planet from another possible disaster: catastrophic climate change.
Look at it this way: More than 600 coal-fired electric plants in the United States produce 36 percent of U.S. emissions — or nearly 10 percent of global emissions — of CO2, the primary greenhouse gas responsible for climate change. Nuclear energy is the only large-scale, cost-effective energy source that can reduce these emissions while continuing to satisfy a growing demand for power. And these days it can do so safely.

And although I don’t want to underestimate the very real dangers of nuclear technology in the hands of rogue states, we cannot simply ban every technology that is dangerous. That was the all-or-nothing mentality at the height of the Cold War, when anything nuclear seemed to spell doom for humanity and the environment. In 1979, Jane Fonda and Jack Lemmon produced a frisson of fear with their starring roles in “The China Syndrome,” a fictional evocation of nuclear disaster in which a reactor meltdown threatens a city’s survival. Less than two weeks after the blockbuster film opened, a reactor core meltdown at Pennsylvania’s Three Mile Island nuclear power plant sent shivers of very real anguish throughout the country.
What nobody noticed at the time, though, was that Three Mile Island was in fact a success story: The concrete containment structure did just what it was designed to do — prevent radiation from escaping into the environment. And although the reactor itself was crippled, there was no injury or death among nuclear workers or nearby residents. Three Mile Island was the only serious accident in the history of nuclear energy generation in the United States, but it was enough to scare us away from further developing the technology: There hasn’t been a nuclear plant ordered up since then.
Today, there are 103 nuclear reactors quietly delivering just 20 percent of America’s electricity. Eighty percent of the people living within 10 miles of these plants approve of them (that’s not including the nuclear workers). Although I don’t live near a nuclear plant, I am now squarely in their camp.
Going Nuclear

An interesting read.

The best article I’ve read on Intelligent Design

Orson Scott Card takes a reasonable and refreshing “pox on both their houses” approach to the subjet.

[W]hen you purport to teach science in school, the subject you teach had better be science, and not somebody’s religion in disguise.
That’s the problem with both sides in this squabble. They are both functioning as religions, and they should stop it at once.
If both sides would behave like scientists, there wouldn’t even be a controversy, because everyone would agree on this statement:
Evolution happens and obviously happened in the natural world, and natural selection plays a role in it. But we do not have adequate theories yet to explain completely how evolution works and worked at the biochemical level.
That is a true statement, according to our present state of scientific knowledge.
And when Darwinists scream that we do too know how to explain evolution, and it’s natural selection, so just stop talking about it, they are dogmatists demanding that their faith — the faith that Darwin’s model will be found to explain everything when we just understand things better — be taught in the public schools.
There is no reason for science teachers in the public schools to take a single step beyond that statement I made above. It allows the teaching of every speck of scientific biology; and it makes moot the as-yet-unknowable issue of how each specific complex biochemical system came into existence.
In fact, what every school board in this country should decide is to ignore both sides’ demands that the schools teach their faith, and allow the public schools to perform their public service: educating children in our shared culture, including what we have learned through the scientific method.
Orson Scott Card


Looks like Alzheimer’s might turn out to be type 3 diabetes.

I can’t believe this is an actual news article

Anheuser-Busch Cos. Inc. said it will quit marketing a drinking game called “Bud Pong” after discovering that some people were imbibing beer during the game instead of water, as directions specified.
The nation’s biggest brewer rolled out “Bud Pong” in July, sending kits to beer wholesalers in 18 states. The bar game is played by bouncing ping pong balls into cups of liquid, with participants taking a drink if they lose a point. Anheuser-Busch suggested players fill the cups with water. A New York Times article Sunday described players using beer instead.
“It has come to our attention that despite our explicit guidelines, there may have been instances where this promotion was not carried out in the manner it was intended,” Anheuser-Busch spokeswoman Francine I. Katz said in a statement Tuesday.

“The intent of this program was to provide adults who socialize in bars with a fun activity,” Katz said in a statement. The company said it was pulling the promotion, and did not want perceptions of the “Bud Pong” game to conflict with a $500 million campaign to promote responsible drinking, Katz said.
It is irresponsible in itself to suggest that water be used during a bar game, said Glynn Birch, national president of Mothers Against Drunk Driving.


4th Avenue Jones – Stereo