Surprise, Not All Stove Are Hot

It is something, likely, as old as stoves. Most folks quickly learn not to touch hot stoves.

Actually, it is not so important today as it was a couple of centuries ago when ole Ben first started building stoves. Generally speaking, when someone would touch a hot stove, they were not apt to repeat it.

Actually, I suspect it went back even farther than that. Before there were stoves, there were fireplaces. Before fireplaces campfires, or their equivalent.

I even heard a tale of one of the big wigs at Levi learning not to kneel next to campfires…first time. It was then that they decided to remove one or two of the rivets from the area just below the fly of their famous canvas trousers.

The one thing brought away from the first experience was the probability of pain, sometimes a little embarrassment too. However, here’s the news. Not all stoves are hot. Not all rivets are hot. It just is that once exposed to these experiences we mostly come away thinking they are, or at least can be. It is referred to as inductive reasoning. Because the first stove we touch is hot, we assume all stoves are hot.

What if the reverse is true. What if the first stove you touch is ambient temperature? Do we then assume that all stoves are cool to the touch. If we do this, we expose ourselves to many painful experiences. This is called inductive reasoning.

While it is useful, it can easily lead to errors. For instance, if we see a brown Labrador retriever, it would be wrong to assume that all dogs are brown and weigh eighty pounds. Indeed, it would be wrong to assume that all Labs are brown. Oddly there are some that are black.

On the other hand, suppose we touch a hundred cool stoves. Can we then assume are stoves are cool? If we see a hundred brown Labs, are we to assume that all labs are brown.

You see, even though we see a large number of examples, we cannot truly assume anything.

Until we see a large enough number of examples, we cannot positively say that we know all labs are brown and that all stoves are cool. Even when working with large numbers, inductive reasoning can lead us astray.

I wish that kids in the eighth grade were required to spend a few hours learning about inductive and deductive reasoning. I am convinced the concept is extremely important in so many parts of life.

Let’s take for instance, the woman that is robbed by an African American. Is it right for her to be afraid of all African Americans? Of course, not. Yet, it may take her years to get over the experience. Our fears are not always founded on good logic. Indeed, her fear might keep her from many good friendships.

The somewhat opposite of inductive reasoning is deductive reasoning. In deductive reasoning, we draw conclusions from many, perhaps exhaustive numbers of examples. It is best that these examples are at random. It is the way that medical research is done. I suppose we can say that statistics and deductive reasoning are interrelated. The more the examples and the more random, the more accurate will be the stats deductive reasoning that depends on the stats.

If we have a random selection of a million dogs, it is likely that only a few will be Labs and we will likely see a few black dogs, white dogs and even a few multi-color dogs. Therefore, we can have a more accurate idea of the coloring of dogs. If we take a random measurement of a million stoves, we might actually find that only 30% are hot enough to cause pain, or even discomfort. (only a wild guess, not am actual statistic)

I’m not going to try to create an equivalent example with the thievery. It’s far too complex and there are too many ways it can go wrong with my imaginary statistics. Moreover, I am not going to suggest that a woman should get robbed a million times. Two or three maybe, but no more. Still, the principles remain firm. With a larger number of examples, we would be able to draw more accurate deductions.

However, we need to be careful about drawing snap conclusions. When we go from the millions of examples and try to derive a single situation from millions of examples, we can still be wrong. For instance, if I may. It would not indicate that a thief is of any ethnicity, and it would be wrong to make any such suggestion.

Yet, every day, I see some people blame Black men because of individual as well as vast statistical data. Those methods just don’t work. And, by the way, the methods don’t work on Caucasian policemen, again, regardless of past inductive or deductive reasoning. You cannot convict a policeman based on past experience just as the woman cannot convict based on past thieves.

Perhaps the most horrible example of inductive reasoning is when the person says, “Single parent families are just as good as two-parent families.” Then they go about calling out two, three or four examples of good kids brough up by single parents. That logic has two holes. First, it is based on a very small count of examples. Second, there is the probability that, if there is a second parent, the child would likely have turned out better. The statistics back it up. We are talking millions of examples not just two or three.

On the other side of the coin, I see people say that a particular person turned out good or bad because of his parent(s). The stats prove that some good kids come from bad or broken homes and bad kids come from homes with good parents.

In this case, the inductive logic gets us nowhere and the deductive logic only shows trends. The trend shows overwhelmingly that two parent homes are better. But logic tells us that it is only true if they are good parents. Abusive and or alcoholic parents rarely qualify as good parents. Yet, again, some good kids come from homes with abusive parents. Sorry. I have no explanation for that. I’m not sure there is one.

For those who are not truly familiar with the terms inductive and deductive reasoning, may I suggest you take an hour or two and look into it on the net. Most will find it far more complex than most of us realize. For instance, one thing that must accurately be determined in inductive reasoning is an accurate correlation. For instance, that dance by that Voo-do doctor likely has nothing to do with that solar eclipse. On the other hand, all that rain I dumped on my lawn the other day likely had nothing to do with the thunderstorm we got the next day, though it did seem a little coincidental. If we collected enough data, it is likely to be proved that the one thing had nothing to do with the other.

Almost Paradise

As I considered the title to this post, I realized I came up with something of a good book title. At least, it seemed that way to me. Now, I need is a good book to go with it. Come to think of it, maybe someone did already. It would be a shame if someone else beat me to it.

The point is that the place I moved to in 1977 was really nice and had been for decades. It was almost paradise, though there were a few problems.

Some of the roads were spread with pot holes. My poor little car had a real problem with the little trailer bouncing around behind us. There were but a small smattering of places to eat and we could find but 1 doctor office, 1 dentist and one pharmacy. The closest hospital was 15 or 16 miles away.

However, the schools were nice and there weren’t many police. Wasn’t much need for them. It truly was almost paradise.

In this world there are problems with paradises. Southern California, before 1950 was an almost paradise. Now, look at it. I won’t go through the list of problems there now. Everyone knows. The desire to live in paradise has destroyed it. Now the U-hauls are leaving and the people are going to other paradises; as Texas, Florida, etc.

in all likelihood, those paradises will be spoiled too. It almost always happens. Unfortunately, paradises draw the unsavory element as well as the exemplary.

It’s happened and is happening where I live. If I possible, I’d leave as soon as i could. If there were an army of police, it would not be enough. The undesirable element is drifting south from Memphis. It does say something about Memphis. No one wants to leave a good place for a worse one.

We now have doctors hospitals dentists, the whole works. Even the streets are smooth. However, it seems that every fourth car I see nowadays has Shelby County plates.

Don’t actually have too much of an objection if they want to spend Tennessee dollars in Mississippi, but they bring their driving habits too. Not only that but they bring their crime, mostly drugs, and robbery too. A couple of years ago, I posted a story about a break in in my house. Dumb thief! One look at my little 900 square foot house and he’d have known I don’t have anything.

The area right across the state line had two big thriving malls and the area around it had a multitude of stores, restaurants and businesses. The malls are now all but closed and the parking lots are all baren.

Needless to say, the value of my little house has skyrocketed. Every time Memphis comes up with a bad idea my property value goes up.

The problem is that as they leave what used to be a near paradise, they bring their stupid ideas with them, and ruin our neighborhoods.

It is not just a local problem. It won’t be long that the illegal aliens will bring their ways to our nation and destroy our national paradise.

This reminds me of a passage in the Bible in which it says that murderers, thieves, liars, adulterers, etc, etc, and so forth will never go to heaven (paradise).

At the time I first read it, I did not see the full significance as I do now. You see, any place where such people are allowed would not be paradise. It would not be long before even the steets of heaven would be ruined. When the corrupt are denied access, about anywhere would be great. Then, with Jesus there too, it will be perfect.

If you would like to go there, you need a reservation. The only way to get the reservation is to accept Jesus as your savior. Then, he will cleanse you. Those not born again are not cleansed. They will not enter paradise. They will only see eternal punishment.

if you think about it, it makes sense. Who wants a paradise full of corruption and the corrupt. Certainly, God doesn’t.

Now if I could just get all these liberals to go back to Memphis where they belong!!

A Question About Safety

I hear all these suggestions to improve safety, AFTER all the shootings. It brings to mind my question, just how many of these victims would still be alive if we continued to have Christian prayer in our schools?

Just 1 minute of prayer daily might have saved, maybe half those killed. Who knows? It might have even saved some of the killers.

You may emphatically said no. The truth is that none of us knows this side of infinity. Still, how horrible it would be to find out that 2 minutes of sincere prayer each day would have saved them all.

I just wish we didn’t have to die to realize the truth.

Then another question comes to mind. What if we did find out? What if somehow God told us. Would it make a difference? Would we begin prayer in our schools? I mean some folks are very defiant. Some folks pretend they care but their only interest is power. They feign interest in saving lives while their real interest is in taking our guns and other Constitutional rights.

As an aside, I find it interesting that the same people who are in favor of gun control for the safety of our children are also in favor of open borders. I mean they want to allow killers, people carrying deadly diseases, deadly drugs and human slavery to stream south to north at rates none of us know.

One aspect we can and do measure are the deaths from fentenyl. Let’s face it. The loss of life due to all shootings is horrible but it is miniscule as compared to those killed by drugs.

God’s Solution

Okay. It has been close to a week since the last tragedy. Horribly, 19 kids and 2 teachers were killed. We have heard the solutions barked out repeatedly by the dems, including the occupier of the Oval Office. It would seem, according to them, it is as simple as outlawing guns.

I see two errors in that logic. Guns have been available since before the Constitution and mass killings have only started in about the last 40 years. Certainly, the problem wasn’t around when I graduated high school.

In the 1960s, the gun laws were minimal. When the shootings started, the gun laws increased. If they would be effective, the shootings would have decreased. Obviously, they had no effect. Indeed, the shootings have only increased.

On the other hand, the Republicans want us to turn our schools into fortresses. Perhaps we need motes around them with draw bridges. We need high windowless stone walls.

I don’t yet know but that might actually work. However, there are still weaknesses in such a plan, though I will not go into the reasons now. They should be obvious.

Instead, I ask why should anything be done? Certainly, I am not suggesting that we shouldn’t do anything. Rather, I ask why the necessity? What happened 40 years ago that started the killings?

To understand, we must look at four things that had its beginning in 50s and 60s

First, and most importantly, Americans began an indifference toward God, His word and His law. This caused many other problems.

Satin and his his minions, the communists, the atheist and people who claimed to have an expert knowledge of the human mind…particularly the child psychologist, started teaching ideas contrary to the Word of God.

As things started turning south, these minions began blaming anything and everything but themselves.

As time went by, the minions turned their attack toward the family, knowing the family is the basic building block of any nation.

Then they turned towards destruction of the schools. Beginning with the colleges, the college students undermined every element of our culture.

The result is that this country bears little resemblance to the 1950s.

Now, they have set their sights on the Constitution, specifically on the 1st and 2nd amendments, which are the most important ones. While on the way to these goals, they are well on the way to destroying our voting systems.

So, what should we do. It’s simple but so difficult. Turn back to God. If the people would turn back to God, the families will be healed and their will be no need for gun laws or motes around our schools.

It is God’s solution and it is the only one that will work. Everything else will fail.

The closer a people are to God, the simpler the solutions

The farther a people are from God, the more difficult the problems.

Build the Wall??

For a long time now, I have written strongly in favor of a wall on the Mexican border. Here lately, I am beginning to wonder if we should build a wall south of Memphis.

We have for years had problems with Memphians. Frequently, Memphis residents brought their attention children to Desoto County schools. Not only is that wrong, it’s illegal.

I suppose it’s an admission that Desoto County schools are better. To be sure, they are doing this at quite a risk. I don’t know what the penalty is but I am sure it would hurt. They risk someone checking plates as they drop off their children.

Besides, it means driving children to and from school. That can’t be easy. Then the kids must learn dishonesty. Not only must they lie about where they live, but they must guard against a slip of the tongue that might reveal their true domicile.

Over time, things kept getting worse. They have brought their driving habits, their drugs and crime.

Now it’s become unbearable. They have brought their politics. That means Desoto County will soon have all the disadvantages of Memphis, including the horrible schools.

So. We need a really big wall.

I suspect that isn’t legal. Maybe it is too late anyway. Well. At least they won’t be bringing their kids to our schools. That will save us a bit on our taxes.

Now, if we can just keep their drugs and crimes north of that little invisible line separating Memphis from Mississippi.

It is sort-of what happens when you allow socialist to migrate into conservative areas.

A Brief Word on Fairness

I have two dogs. Suzie-Q is a mix lab and Chinese Sharpe. Misty is some kind of hunting dog, I guess. Both are rescues but they don’t know it. They both figure they are part of the family.

They have something of a sense of fairness. When I give one a treat, the other one knows she is going to get one too. If I walk one, the other expects she will have her chance as well. If I pet one, the other comes over and reminds me that she needs attention too. I had to buy each of them a bed. If I hadn’t you can imagine what that would be like.

The point is, they both know that fair is fair. That appears to be more than some people know. Expecting men and women to compete against each other in most sports events is just wrong. Then again maybe I am the one who is wrong. Maybe these people know it isn’t fair. In fact, I think they do. Certainly, if a dog understands fairness, certainly people who have letters following their name know something of fairness.

It sort makes things worse; doesn’t it?

Twenty-six Letters

Our alphabet contains 26 letters. Learning to read would be easy if each had its own unique sound. However, all the vowels have at least 2 sounds. One of the letters has at least three sounds. Then, of course, some vowels sometimes have no sound.

The letters C and G each have two sounds, which are designated as hard and soft. The rest of the consonants have but one sound. Then again, some of them are sometimes silent… such as the K in know. I have no idea how that happened but it is just one more thing to make learning to read more difficult.

Then of course, there are the combinations. I guess that the most common combination is the th. It is so common that it is used in almost every sentence of any size.

Yet I believe reading can taught or learned quickly by combining two methods. First, there is phonics, the sounds of the letters. If a person learns the sound of three letters a day for 9 days, a person will learn the sounds of all 26 letters in a week and a half. It is not the perfect solution, but it is a giant step in the right direction.

The second method, what I call recognition, is also important. Some might think it odd, but about 100 words make up about 60 percent of our words by count. First, there are the articles, a, an and the. You will find them in almost all sentences and they are easy to learn.

Then, there are there are the pronouns (he, she, it, his hers, etc). Again, they are easy to learn and they are well peppered throughout our language. Anyone who learns these few words will be well on their way to learning.

Using these two methods, a person can easily learn the basics of reading in weeks, not months. It would certainly be less than years.

I would really like to experiment with this method and I understand there are some who can’t read. However, for that to happen, it would mean getting three things together: me, a place of reasonable comfort to serve as a classroom and, naturally, a few students. I believe I could teach about 8 to 10 at a time for a couple of hours a day. I believe I can have most in the class reading at 5th or maybe 6th grade level in a little more than a month.

It is not as if I would need to teach much in the way of vocabulary. Most of us have pretty good vocabularies by the time we reach 5 or 6. It would be a simple matter of learning to recognize the words on paper, or a screen.

I have been considering making an attempt at it. So far, I haven’t managed to get anything off the ground. I guess there are two problems. First, finding a class room. Second, finding 8 people who want to learn. The trick is that I have something of a catch 22. How do I advertise for students when they can’t read?

Then, as every knows, reading is the gateway to the world. Also, it is an important skill for learning other things. Most of us, by the time we’re 30, over half of what we have learned, we will have learned by reading. If you find a person who is intelligent, he or she will likely be well read.

Besides this and more important, it is very difficult to enslave a populace that can’t read. Finally, as a side affect, people who are well read generally can speak better. In a way, it rubs off.

WHAT’S THE QUESTION??

After the recent Virginia election, I heard an exit poll that reported the number one concern of the voters was economy. In another exit poll, I heard the big concern was how the China virus was handled. I guess if you check with five different polling outfits, you might get two, maybe three different answers.

My question is what was the question? Did they hand the voter a piece of paper with a list and tell the voter to select the most important. On the other hand, did they just ask, what was your most important concern. To me, this is important.

First, if you know a little about me, you know I don’t like surveys and I guess a poll is something of a survey. The problem with all surveys is that those conducting the survey generally have a horse in the race. So, they like to ask the questions in ways in which the replies might be a little skewed. Moreover, they like to include questions to which there are no proper answers. The one that really put a sour taste in my mouth a few years ago was the question, are you or are you not in favor of immigration? To me there is no proper answer. Obviously, the pollster was trying to create a poll that would show that most people are in favor of immigration while the truth is that most likely the majority believe as I do. I believe in legal and only legal immigration.

So my question to the pollsters is, did your question color your response? To me, the best question would be what was your most important concern? Even a list can color a response, especially if the person’s choice is not present. If the pollsters do use a list, at least they need to include a, “None of the above.”

And so it is that we are led to believe that school issues were of little import in the Virginia election. Is that really true, or is it that the pollsters got it wrong again? Did they ask the right questions in the right way?

By the way, for those interested, I do not answer surveys anymore at all. If someone were to ask me a question as I leave a voting place, I will lie through my teeth and give them all wrong answers. The only real vote that counts is the one I put in the voting box.

A Jefferson Quote Worth Remembering

When the people fear the government, you have tyranny. When the government, you have liberty.

Maybe the FOCs should remember that, especially the one running governor of Virginia. That fellow put his foot so far down his throat that he will need a surgeon to remove it. Moreover, it just might send a red tsunami all the way to California.

It’s Just Not the Same

Many people like like to point out the migration that took place on Ellis Island and try to equivocate it the avalanche of those coming across the Mexican border. Even as they speak, they know it’s not nearly the same, that is unless they have less of a brain than a nail on the wall.

For those unable to figure out the difference, let me explain it.

First, no one who was sick was permitted into the country. Indeed the hospital where they were kept still stands and, though I might be wrong, it can still be toured. It was where the diseased were kept until well. Those who were not curable went back to where they came from. Had AIDS been a disease back then, no one would have been permitted in with it. However, today it is a political disease and people with AIDS are permitted in regularly, which likely resulted in the loss of many lives. Because there is no desire to do any tracing, there is no way to tell how many. There is no way to make a reasonable guess.

Secondly, it was highly organized. All who tried to enter were interviewed and if they were considered undesirable. they were returned to their country. Certainly, those who had a desire to overthrow the country were not permitted in. Those who had no money or a desired trade were turned away. It was not intended that we should be the welfare state of the world. Finally, those who were criminals were returned to their own country. To be sure, we were not perfect in this regard. Apparently, many criminals did make it through. However, they also turned many away. On the Mexican border, none are turned away.

Third, there were limits, quotas for each country. The obvious attempt was to keep any one nation from overwhelming our civilization. Even though most did separate themselves somewhat into groups, they eventually did assimilate. Until recently, we spoke one language in the schools businesses and our government. Now, when school meetings are held, it is not uncommon for them to be held in three languages. Worse, children are in our schools who don’t know the how to speak English, let alone read and write. They are not the only ones affected. All the learning is hampered.

And, by the way, it makes it more expensive too. Many who of those slowing the learning should not be in the classroom. They are there illegally. If ten illegal children are in a class, that means two-thirds are paying to educate three-thirds. That is not right.

Fourth, many who come over the border are criminals. It causes the crime rates to go up and it increases the cost of enforcing the law. Many communities that were reasonably peaceful now have a meaningful population of criminals who are not Americans.

Fifth, back in the day, cartels did not control our borders. Nowadays, they do control the Mexican borders. The US would be completely right to send in troops and wipe out the cartels. The US is under their attack. However, no one, but not one will do that, though they fire across the river nightly.

If things were now as they were then, I would not mind the immigration. Somehow, I don’t think there are many who will pay me any attention. They are afraid of someone saying something in the social media, which would force them out into the Outer Limits.

So instead, they watch as our nation falls into oblivion.

OH YES! ONE MORE THING. BACK THEN WE DID NOT HAVE THE FLOOD OF DEADLY DRUGS OVER THE BORDERS.

BUILD THE WALL!!