Time Flies

Time flies, if you can, but it takes a keen eye.

Some may have difficulty making sense of the above sentence. If so, the hint is that “[You]” is the understood subject.

Maybe you can have some fun with your friends and the above sentence, which though it appears nonsense, is a proper, though useless sentence.

And by way, the sentence makes far more sense than some of the going green ideas out there.

I Knew it Had to Happen!

When they came out with battery powered push mowers, I knew the battery powered rider mower would be next. I even predicted it in one of my posts.

When I visited Lowes this afternoon, I noticed two zero turn machines that had electric mower trademarks on them.

I made a point to check them out on the way in. They had a sign on it that bragged 2 acres on a charge. I actually do have a decent sized yard, but it doesn’t get close to a 1/4 of an acre. Sadly, my yard just doesn’t justify the price tag.

Even so, considering my age, I was still tempted. Maybe I could use it to make money. I could advertise a green friendly way to keep your lawn well manicured. I wonder just how many lawns it would take to justify spending $5500.

Maybe one or two of my readers can figure a way to pretend I need a zero turn rider mower.

Maybe they will come out with a little lawn tractor mower soon. Maybe they will come out with one I can afford. In the meantime, I guess I will trudge behind the one I have. At least it’s electric. That will make those “going green” nuts happy.

Oh. And by the way. I won’t have to pay road tax to cut my grass.

A Curiosity

There is a question of small significance based on the Bible and prophecy. Just why is it that the US is not mentioned in the Bible. It does seem to many that the Bible has left out half the world. Some might even suggest it is one of the more important parts.

Many have asked the question. Some have suggested answers. Personally, I don’t know. I do consider it something of a curiosity, though I would never let such a thing cause any doubts in the accuracy of God’s word.

As near as I can figure, what happens in terms of prophecy in the western hemisphere, is of little significance. Currently, that seems highly unlikely.

However, it would not take but a few days for that to change.

  1. A natural disaster. California, the Mid-south and many other places in Mexico and South America have serious fault lines. Just lately I found out there are faults under New York too, though not currently active. From time to time, I have been reminded that Yellowstone sets a top a huge volcano capable of destroying most of this country and send ashes worldwide. Such a thing just might help fulfill prophecies. I don’t know. As I say. I just observe.
  2. It might be war or a few terrorists. China, Iran and a few other countries would like American history to end. The Dems, on the other hand, seem to be inviting terrorists over an open border. A few well placed nuclear weapons would destroy our nation. Just look what 3 well placed planes did. Many take our national security for granted. They like the advantages of living here but they are not willing to help pay for it.
  3. Finally, there is the possibility of destruction from within. Those who say the Republicans are destroying democracy are tearing our Constitution asunder. Without the 10 amendments to protect us, the US will crumble.

Maybe none of this will happen. I don’t know. If any of it does, I hope I don’t live to see it. On the other hand, the more I observe, the more I believe it will be the third. With the dems such as they are, the Lord will not need to send natural disasters or even an enemy to destroy the nation he sees going very much astray. We will do a really great job of destroying ourselves.

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.

Burning Fuel

John Kerry flies private jet aircraft, a lot. I did a little checking around. His plane burns likely 6 to 7 gallons of fuel per minute, about what I burn in a week.

I think before he has the right to tell me anything about saving fuel, he needs to start flying commercial.

If he wants to go around boring holes in the sky at speeds approaching the speed of sound, i have no problems with it. However, if he wants to be the spokesman of global warming, he really should stop contributing so much to warming the globe.

Going Green and Socialism

Considering the way that going green is joined at the hip with socialism, one might think they are inseparable. Yet, history proves just the opposite.

When the Berlin wall came down, one of the biggest surprises about East Berlin was the tragic level of ecology in the east. West Berlin: Freedom, good economy and clean. East Berlin:suffering, failed economy and ecological disaster.

Moreover, had the socialist had their way and West Berlin were swallowed up by the east it would have become as filthy as the east. As it was the east prospered as the west. Even more, it has become much cleaner.

Let us go down the list. The Soviets, the Chinese, Venezuelan, and, oh, yes. Let’s not forget The People’s Republic of California, which actually was pretty nice when it was in the hands of Republicans. All of these shows what happens to the ecology when the socialist take the helm.

So, maybe socialism and going green aren’t nearly as compatible as some would like us think.

Cutting Costs

Joe says it’s not his fault. He says that there’s nothing he can do about it. Yet since he occupied the Oval Office, things have been going up, fast…gas, milk, cars, rent, cable, dining out, etc, etc.

I’m retired now so I thought I was immune somewhat from the increase in gas costs. Wow! Was I wrong! I mean I only fill my 13 gallon tank every other week but it over costs twice as much to. Every time I go into the grocery store, it costs me $130 or more to get out…and we visit the local restaurants quite often.

The realization has hit me. It’s time to cut costs or our bank accounts will start shrinking. So I’ve started preparing a list of things we won’t need.

1st. Cable and internet. They are really nice but we don’t need them. Dropping them will say more $150 a month. I’ll have to rely on the old antenna for entertainment. Oddly, I’ll miss the DVR more than the stations. Other than a few news stations, I watch very little. Though I must admit I will miss watching Hannity, I can still listen to him 3 hours on the radio. Besides all this, they raise their costs every now and without my permission.

2nd. Cell phones. This one is painful for a number of reasons. Mostly I, it is a matter of emergencies. For instance, if I need to call a tow truck or I have an accident. The alternative to T-mobile is going with the cheapest company I can find.

3rd. We will need to eat at home more. I don’t mind cooking. I just don’t like the clean up. Besides, with just the two of us, we end up wasting a lot. I hate that. It rubs me the wrong way. Well, the going green folks would like it. It would cut back on my fuel usage. On the other hand, those at the local eateries wouldn’t like losing my business. On the other hand the cable company will not miss me. In Indeed, they sort of act like they want to get rid of me.

Beyond that, I guess I will have to go back to work. I’ve already considered that option. I’d already be punching time clock but my wife panics when she’s left alone. I guess if Joe keeps running things, I’ll have to figure out something.

The Biggest Fear of Our Forefathers

As they were froming the federal government, one fear drove them more than anything else. It is the reason for having 3 separate parts:legislative, executive and judicial. Each has its own powers and limits. That way, the hope was that no one person or group of people would exceed their authority.

In addition, they added 10 amendments. If you study them carefully, you’ll see that, while each has its purpose, collectively they have 1 purpose, to protect the individuals from the government.

Now, why did they feel the need for protection from our government. It’s because they were afraid of the tyranny of the majority.

Without the bill of rights, the majority could take control of the government. Then, ironically it could be ruled by a small minority. If you doubt the fear to be valid, look at what we have now, a one party rule.

The hope of the forefathers was that a free press would keep them in check. On the contrary, they are doing all they can to assist the overthrow of our constitution.

Now the Bill of Rights is on the verge of being trodden under the feet of socialists. They hate freedom of religion and they are destroying our rights to have our say. They want to remove our right to defend ourselves. I could go on but I’m sure you get the picture.

Still, I must add one more remark i heard lately. It would seem that the dems interpret the 10th amendment as reserving all powers not specified in the Constitution to the democrat party.

Maybe it’s a joke, but I am sure they would accept said power without a second thought.

To be sure, we just might be realizing the tyranny of the majority within the decade. It was the primary fear of the framers of our Constitution and today, the threat stands before us and it isn’t even well hidden. What a legacy to leave for our children, especially considering the freedom we inherited.

Long Range E.V.s

As I have a minor interst in electric vehicles, I generally try to keep an eye on them, especially concerning their range. As near as I can tell, none have a range of more than 500 or so miles between changes. Most are limited to 300 to 350.

Now, to my surprise, I hear Representative Debbie Stabenow bought a new E. V. and drove it from Michigan to D. C. , waving as she passed the gas stations.

Now, considering that is about 700 or so miles, that really surprised me. I didn’t know any E. V. has anywhere near that range.

Then, maybe, and I do mean maybe, she was being followed by a pickup carrying a heavy duty generator. On the other hand, she could have driven straight through, though if I did it, I’d be so stiff I’d need help getting out of the car.

Oh, there I go assuming things again. The car might have very comfortable seats in it. Still, that is a very long time to sit behind the wheel at one time me.

I simply have no idea why she didn’t take a plane, which would take far less time. Better yet, it would be more green to take the bus. That way she could do some paperwork on the way.

Regardless, I’m glad she can afford the E. V. Conveniently, she will not pay the road tax charges, which the rest of us pay when we fill up at the pump.

It’s the Saltwater!

For many years, I’ve wondered why almost all the people in states with coastlines seem to have lost their abilities to reason. California and New York, the states with the most coastline are the states are also the states with the least people with good reason.

Then, I considered Chicago. OK. They have no saltwater but they do have a coastline. I guess I need to modify my theory, all coastlines.

Wait a minute! Maybe Florida has more saltwater coastline than any other state.

The question does, however comes to mind. Is it the coasts that warp the minds or does the water simply attract those who lack reasonable reasoning.

There seems to be no doubt. You look in any of the states with coasts and the problem is always worse the closer they are to the water. Consider Long Island and San Francisco. They are almost surrounded by water.

Maybe we need to quickly put some kind of barrier arround Florida before they become the liberal capitol of world.