Tuesday, June 30, 2009

What a week! May I sleep in until all this mess is over?

Greetings all:

I'm kind of numb right now. The last week ... the last 24 hours ... it all just gets weirder and weirder. It is kind of tough to freak out seasoned Portlanders with weirdness - but here I am numbly clicking away. The weirdness seems to track more and more familiarly back to President Obama's desk and the Democratic tangle of doom surrounding him.

Again a bit tangential to the usual Darwin-hating rant, but a few consequences of the old boy's illogical logic have maybe intruded into our current politics and economy.

In my last post I mentioned we are looking at a U.S. federal debt in 10 years of $200,000 per household (double the current debt) - if our kids are lucky. A June 10, 2009, Bloomberg article says,
"For the fiscal year that ends Sept. 30, the CBO forecasts the deficit to reach a record $1.845 trillion, almost four times the previous fiscal year’s $454.8 billion shortfall. "

So I thought I just might run the numbers as a quick intro to what I really want to get to today. Again using the 2007 number of 111.2 million households, that means that each American household was blessed with a one-year increase of a RECORD $4100 in the 2007-2008 Federal budget (ending September 30, 2008). That is about what my two old used cars are worth combined. But, hey, you ain't seen nuthin' yet. The projected 2008-2009 one-year Federal deficit pencils out to $16,600 per household. And you were worried about paying off that washer and dryer on your credit card? That is just dust on the scales compared to the Fed deficit numbers. It's like you just bought a new car and your kids signed the promissory note. Oh - and another new car next year, and the next, and ...

Now on to ...


(1)The "Cap and Trade" bill (known to realists as the "Cap and Tax") squeaked by in the U.S. House of Representatives and now moves on to the U.S. Senate. This ecofreak darling is designed to rescue us from the imminent peril of global warming, at the cost of ... hmmm, how much? Let's see....

David Kreutzer, a senior policy analyst in energy, economics, and climate change at the Heritage Foundation, "estimates that House-approved legislation limiting greenhouse gas emissions will hit consumers with a 60-percent spike in gasoline prices and a 90-percent increase in electricity prices, after inflation. ... we find that the impact per household will be, for a family of four, about $3,000 per year for the first 24 years, and that's as far out as we analyzed it."

All this at the same time that Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla, has ordered an investigation into the Environmental Protection Agency's alleged suppression of a report that questioned the science behind global warming. "The 98-page report, co-authored by EPA analyst Alan Carlin, pushed back on the prospect of regulating gases like carbon dioxide as a way to reduce global warming. Carlin's report argued that the information the EPA was using was out of date, and that even as atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have increased, global temperatures have declined."

If your pants pockets are empty now, prepare to lose your pants. And you may need them even more since, recently, we have a cooling spell going on.

Maybe it will be easier just to call your U.S. senator now and fill him/her in.

(2) President Obama sided with Hugo Chavez and others to support a recalcitrant dictator wannabe in Honduras who was legally and constitutionally ousted by his own national congress and supreme court - and replaced by the successor called for by their constitution. I watched with fascination into the early hours of the morning as the Yahoo "Buzz" comments came in on the AP story, "U.N. Backs Ousted Honduran Leader" and a preceding article which it replaced. (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jAkMGKIUDg_ngUiZboxQbYj5_DPwD99553D00)
There were well over 200 comments, and all but a handful were very supportive of the Honduran government to throw the rascal out. If you watched those comments roll in, you would know there a lot of angry Americans and Hondurans (and American Cubans) out there watching our president. The theme was repeated again and again that the Honduran National Congress and Supreme Court carried out their responsibilities, according to their constitution! And even Hillary almost got it right. And why in the (%&# numerous expletives deleted) would Mr. Obama side with Chavez and other SA socialists to try to reinstate an ousted newbie-socialist who rapidly wore out his welcome with illegal actions in his own nation?

(3) The U.S. Supreme Court reversed a ruling against Connecticut firefighters who, after successfully passing an examination required for promotion, had been unfairly denied promotions because not enough minorities passed the exam. The firefighters sued and finally, at the end, the U.S. Supremes got it right - that discrimination is not lawful, no matter on which side of the ethnic divide you may be. What is really fascinating is that the Supreme Court justices threw out a decision that high court nominee Sonia Sotomayor had endorsed as an appeals court judge.
After Judge Sotmayor's prima facie sexist/racist comments were outed by conservatives following her nomination by President Obama, now our highest court in the land agrees. That was the one sweeeeet spot of the week.

(4) Pesident Obama hosted a dinner and reception for the leading lights of the Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual-Transgendered and Gay Pride Month folks last night.
His statements reaffirm his outrageous opposition to the clearly stated (by votes) will of the majority of people of the majority of states in the USA. See:

"At a White House celebration of Gay Pride Month, Obama said he hopes to persuade all Americans to accept homosexuality. 'There are good and decent people in this country who don't yet fully embrace their gay brothers and sisters -- not yet,' said the president. ... 'There are still fellow citizens, perhaps neighbors or even family members and loved ones, who still hold fast to worn arguments and old attitudes,' he stated. He added that Congress should repeal what Obama referred to as 'the so-called Defense of Marriage Act' "

Yes, I am one of those who hold those "worn arguments and old attitudes." Not because I decide on my own, but simply because the Bible, the Word of God, says so. This is kind of where we can get back to the Bible really quickly. If you think sodomy is so great, just remember what happened to Sodom - and why.


So what is the origin of marriage? It is the first institution ordained by the Creator God. In the Bible we can read,
"18 Then the LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper s
uitable for him."
19 Out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the sky, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called a living creature, that was its name.
20 The man gave names to all the cattle, and to the birds of the sky, and to every beast of the field, but for Adam there was not found a helper suitable for him.
21 So the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; then He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that place.
22 The LORD God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man.
23 The man said, 'This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.'
24 for this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh. "
Genesis 2:18-24, The Holy Bible (NASB)

Maybe now you can see why it is so important to keep holding Darwin's feet to the fire, since his poisonous rebellion against the Almighty infects so many - and we are now bearing the consequences corporately as a nation in many seemingly unrelated areas.

I'm tired.

And if you are all reading the same news I am reading, then you also know that either full-scale repentance or full-scale bitterness lies ahead for what used to be a great nation - the United States of America..

Submitted with great respect for the brave who stand:

-- Honduran National Congress and Supreme Court;
-- Connecticut firefighters and five judges in our USA Supreme Court;
-- EPA global warming analyst Alan Carlin;
-- Republicans AND Democrats who voted against the outrageous Cap and Trade bill;
-- preachers in churches who do not compromise and so declare God's word boldly;
-- and more,


P.S. Maybe I will get to the carbon-14 content of coal and diamonds one of these days. Got other stuff to do first. Hint - if the earth is even 100,000 years old, the C-14 should not be there in measurable and repeatable amounts. And it is NOT contamination from modern C-14. Oh ... and Accelerator Mass Spectrometry is cool.

Sunday, June 28, 2009

Generational looting? Who is gonna pay for all the Dem's plans ???

Well, it is late (3:00 AM), but I just got around to seriously asking ...

A couple of questions:

(1) How much additional debt is planned by the Obama administration over the next ten years? and

(2) How many households in the USA?

And found the results:

(1) Investor's Insight says:

"Using the Obama administration's own projections, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that, including the record 2009 budget deficit of $1.85 trillion, and huge annual deficits over 2009-2019 will result in an additional $11.1 trillion in national debt, on top of the current $11.4 trillion."


"During the first 100 days of his presidency, Obama has signed the $787 billion stimulus bill into law, proposed an eye-popping $3.6 trillion federal budget for the 2010 fiscal year, taken over a massive $700 billion Wall Street bailout program (TARP) and created other multi-billion-dollar government programs supposedly to help grease the economic wheels."


(2) Wikipedia gives a 2007 figure for number of households:

"How many households are in the US? 2007 estimate: 111,162,259"


And then the math ...

So the additional deficit per household may be estimated to be:

$1.11 * 10**13 / 1.11 * 10**8, or $100,000 per household. But since this is on top of the existing debt which is already $11.4 trillion, this comes up to a very un-nice round figure of $200,000 per household.

And now the angst ...

Please tell me it ain't so. Please tell me I can't do math any more.

$200,000 per household federal debt in a mere 10 years from now!

Oh, and Oregon is going in the tank too - just a few steps behind California. Oregon can not even afford to collect water information data needed to meet development application requirements. I look at my children and my grandchildren and ask how can they repay this kind of onerous debt? I agree with those who call this "generational looting"

When will the Democrats and fellow-traveling Republicans end this mindless spend-a-thon? When you hear "shovel ready", just understand the shovels are digging the grave of the America we have known. When will the Obamamedia cease the Obamamania and get real? When will the people of the USA get a grip on these numbers and then get a grip on the collars of the big spenders and toss them out?

But we will not get a grip on the dollar until we get a grip on the Divine.

And the understanding ...

If you really want to understand what is going on, read the Bible, Deuteronomy Chapter 28. You will find that when a nation wears the name of God, that nation best not sully that great and Holy name YHWH - the name of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Because God is not mocked and will not be mocked.

Here is a photo reminding that - like it or not - the USA does wear the name of God - the CREATOR GOD - before the world even on the dollar as we claim "In God We Trust". Credit: Graphic Night Photo

You will find that our financial insanity is a direct result of our spiritual profanity.

It is truly time for personal, corporate (churches as well as governments and businesses) and national repentance. And time is of the essence.

Signing off at 3:49 AM. Going to bed. Hope I can sleep.


Saturday, June 27, 2009

Storing hydrogen in carbonized chicken feathers to save the planet?

Hey all:

This one is so cool, after I laughed at reading it I just had to pass it on.

It has been long obvious to me and to many (such as a personal friend and former Mechanical Engineering professor at Portland State University) that a hydrogen economy would be a boon to solve the world's concerns about fossil fuels for transportation - if only the storage problem could be solved.

The beauty of hydrogen gas as a fuel is that its combustion product is simply water vapor - preferable even to the carbon dioxide (a greenhouse gas) combustion product of natural gas. The problem is that extremely large tanks would be needed to store hydrogen gas even under high pressure. Some folks have succeeded in reducing the storage size significantly by storing hydrogen gas in carbon nanotubes, but the cost of the nanotube tank would be several times the cost of a car with today's nanotechnology.

And now today I saw on page one of the Oregonian that one potential answer may lie in carbonizing the lowly chicken feather:


The research, done at the University of Delaware, was reported in the university's paper a couple of days ago:


in which it was reported:

"Chicken feather fibers are mostly composed of keratin, a natural protein that forms strong, hollow tubes. When heated, this protein creates crosslinks, which strengthen its structure, and becomes more porous, increasing its surface area. The net result is carbonized chicken feather fibers, which can absorb as much or perhaps more hydrogen than carbon nanotubes or metal hydrides, two other materials being studied for their hydrogen storage potential, Wool says. Plus, they're cheap. Using carbonized chicken feathers would only add about $200 to the price of a car, according to Wool. By comparison, making a 20-gallon hydrogen fuel tank that uses carbon nanotubes could cost $5.5 million; one that uses metal hydrides could cost up to $30,000, Wool says."

So why would I blog on this today? First - yeah, even creationists are interested in the planet. Duhhhh. Second - the combined strength and light weight of feathers (due in part to the keratin protein and in part to structural design) have long been considered by creationists as a powerful example of design in nature. And not only are feathers a mechanical wonder, they can also be wonders of beauty. Here is my backyard photo of a peacock feather:

So - strength, functionality, and beauty - all are to be found in God's created world because they were created for those purposes. If you don't like that answer, go use your superior intelligence to make a better feather.

Recall again the words of Job 12:7-10 (Holy Bible, NASB):

7. "But now ask the beasts, and let them teach you; And the birds of the heavens, and let them tell you. 8. "Or speak to the earth, and let it teach you; And let the fish of the sea declare to you. 9. "Who among all these does not know that the hand of the LORD has done this, 10. In whose hand is the life of every living thing, and the breath of all mankind?"

Submitted with great pleasure and satisfaction,


Tuesday, June 23, 2009

Speak to the earth and let it teach you ....

Are you wondering about the beginnings of it all? Are you an observer of nature, seeking what may be learned about the nature of life?

I was just reading in the Bible this morning and decided to share these words of wisdom from Job. The Oregon sunset is an added bonus..

Respectfully submitted,


Monday, June 22, 2009

Powerful proof that the creation account in Genesis 1:1 - 2:3 is historical narrative, not poetry

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth ..."
Historical narrative? Statistically certain.
Poetry? Statistically indefensible.

Just a followup today to my earlier post:

I pointed out that Professor Karplus' claim that the text of Genesis 1:1 - 2:3 may be taken as poetic rather than as historical narrative was contrary to recent text analysis. The issue seems important enough that I now provide brief detail about that text analysis.


Among other references, you may find one very thorough text analysis in:

Boyd, Steven. W., "Evidence for an Historical Reading of Genesis 1:1 - 2:3", pp. 631-734 in Vardiman et al, Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth - II, Results of a Young-Earth Creationist Research Initiative. Institute for Creation Research, El Cajon, CA, 2005. 618 pp.

Here is Boyd's Figure 10 (p. 674):

The abscissa value represents the ratio of preterite verbs to total finite verbs in selected Hebrew Bible texts while the ordinate represents the probability of a text being a narrative as opposed to a poetic text. The preterite verb form for the most part is a sequential past tense (Boyd, p. 651). The sample to "calibrate" this classification analysis consisted of fourteen clearly narrative Hebrew Bible texts and fourteen clearly poetic Hebrew Bible texts (Boyd, p. 652). The Genesis 1:1 - 2:3 text had a ratio 0.655 preterite to total finite verbs. The classification analyis gives a probability between 0.999942 and 0.999987 at a 95.5% confidence level that the Genesis 1:1 - 2:3 text is historical narrative. I have highlighted the Genesis 1:1 - 2:3 text on the plot (the blue triangle) by pointing to it with the BIG RED ARROW.


First, why all the numbers stuff? Because too many folks want to read allegorical or symbolic language into the Genesis creation account. They wave their hands and dismiss it as "poetic" despite what what the text on the face of it would convey. So the Boyd analysis is kind of numbers-in-your-face if you really want to insist that an apparently historical narrative is poetic/allegorical.

Now how to understand it. The statistical tools Boyd uses are in the general category of "classification." This is a common application of statistics in science. For example, a hospital diagnosis protocol for a person exhibiting certain symptoms may quantify a suite of symptoms and use a classification analysis (or discriminant analysis) to determine the probability that a person has "disease A" requiring extended hospital isolation and $20,000 for medications, as opposed to "disease B" which would require a few aspirin and a couple of days rest. This would be precisely analogous to the Bible text question.

For the case at hand, we only have to decide between two "classes": historical narrative or poetry. The very small overlap in the samples (almost all of the poetic texts have the preterite/total ratio less than 0.2, while almost all of the historical narratives have a preterite/total ratio greater than o.25) kind of jumps out at you suggesting that the "common sense" reading of the text as historical is backed up by the classification analysis.

Consider an analogy. Suppose at the Beijing Olympics the shoes from the American men's basketball team have been accidentally mixed in with the shoes from the Chinese women's table tennis team, and I have a job simply to look at the shoe size for each pair and toss the shoes into a bin for USA-Men-Basketball or into a bin for PRC-Women-TableTennis. The classification task might be similar to that shown in Boyd's Figure 10 above. There might be a few pair that could conceivably go into either bin and I might make a wrong decision or two. But generally the spread is so great that I am going to get the right answer almost all of the time.

So may I say it? For the folks who wish to insist that the Genesis 1:1 - 2:3 text is poetic, it might not be as bad as tossing Shaqille O'Neil's size 22 shoes in the women's shoe bin, but more like throwing LaBron James' 15.5 shoes to the ladies. Do you seriously want to do that?


"The logistic regression model calculates the probability that a text is narrative. For Genesis 1:1 - 2:3, this probability is between 0.999942 and 0.999987 at a 95.5% confidence level. Thus we conclude with statistical certainty that this text is narrative, not poetry. It is therefore statistically indefensible to argue that this text is poetry."

Respectfully submitted,


Wednesday, June 10, 2009

Trying to send good vibes and think positive thoughts? How about prayer? North Korea captive Laura Ling's friends on the wrong trail

Greetings today from a dreary drippy northwest day when I would prefer to see and smell cut hay drying in sun-kissed fields.

And if you have ever had the opportunity to compare taste-deprived commercially-grown California strawberries (they look great forever it seems - like souped up on botox) with fresh sweet succulent Oregon strawberries, you will understand why I am hoping for a last push of ripening weather before Sunday for our annual post-graduation outing.

For today I comment on the power of man's mind versus the power of God. And in immediate introspection I find that I also am being infected by our Oregon left-coast culture of "me not Thee." Did you notice in the paragraph above I wrote I am "hoping" for ripe berries. I know of no inherent "hoping" power to effect any result except self-inflicted anxiety. Knowing as I do that God is the God of details as well as the God of the largest picture, I should be praying for ripe berries instead of "hoping."

So what sparks today's blurb? I suppose you have heard of the recent spying convictions in North Korea of two American investigative reporters. I just read a few minutes ago in the Silicon Valley MercuryNews.com (http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_12556506?source=most_viewed)
that friends of Laura Ling, one of the convicted journalists, are trying to help the situation in Korea by use of brain-waves from California. Ling's long-time friend Cheryll Marsh "is confident her friend of 20 years is coping with the ordeal. 'She is brave and courageous,' Marsh said. Still, 'having her thousands of miles away is just so heartbreaking. But we're all trying to send good vibes and think positive thoughts.'"

Is there any rational basis to suggest that "trying to send good vibes and think positive thoughts" will be causative in what comes down? I would say no. On the contrary, prayer to the omniscient omnipotent omnipresent and merciful Almighty God of Heaven and earth has been found effectual across centuries, across cultures, and across time zones. And if you, dear reader, are not aware of this reality then you are deprived of enlightenment. Find some good Christian books about real experiences of real people with real needs with real devotion to a very real God, and you will begin to scratch the surface of the great reality of God's willing merciful involvement in the minutiae of our lives if we will but welcome Him.

This is the great reality show that seems underappreciated in America today.

Here is what Jehovah God said to Solomon as he dedicated the temple in Jerusalem around 959 B.C.: "2 Chronicles 7:14 (NASB) "...if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land."

The power we have is not in our minds. Our power is in our free will submission the the will and law of the God who does have the true power.

Respectfully submitted,