Slow down, you're movin' too fast... you got to make the moment last, now..

The title is a reference to an old song for you pipsqueaks with no music training...

When we accept something basic as true, anything that challenges that truth is rejected.

That is the state of science on both the secular and intelligent design groups. Rather than shifting their mountains of claims to examine the truth of their foundational precepts, they'll ridicule or dismiss anything that challenges precepts. That's the essence of Ben Stein's new movie No Intelligence Allowed (or something like that). The secular science of our time is so strong that anything attacking foundational concepts is immediately rejected.

Enter Barry Setterfield. His ideas are so damaging to both sides of the evolutionary debate, it's laughable. Some creationists seize on his work just because it supports their beliefs (but without really examining it). Other creationists realize that it also attacks their precept that radiometric dating is wrong... and if that's true, they have a lot to apologize for. Evolutionists laugh at it, because if his theory is true then evolution is impossible.

Barry's theory is that the speed of light is slowing down exponentially. I'm not a math guy, so I have no true way to understand his position, but I'm intrigued by it. It ties up a lot of little knots that no one else has explained.

Do I think he's right? Dunno, but he could be. If he were right, it turns a whole lot on it's ear.

Check his theories for yourself: http://www.setterfield.org/

Have fun.

The Booger Bites the Big One

George Carlin has passed away. Ye, though his mouth was so trashy his ear should be a flush handle, I will miss the kindly philosopher. George's commentary on the absurdity of life was often spot on and always hilarious. And with his journey into night, a thousand media workers whose job it was to hit the BLEEP button are sure to be laid off. Not to mention a lot of pushers will be poorer...

The Incredible Hulk

Aptly named. Also known as Hulk: The Apology, they got everything right in this that they got wrong in the first one (which is everything). Very innovate, they told the origin in flash cuts in the first few minutes of the film. Edward Norton was great as Banner, and Liv Tyler, whom I don't care for, was pretty good (but nothing will make that girl pretty). It says something that the Banner parts were just as good or better than the Hulk parts.

I've heard people complain that Spider-Man was way too obviously CGI; those people will hate this movie, too. You simply can't get away from that yet, and Hulk is cartoony, but intriguingly so, nonetheless.

Marvel has figured out the formula to making their comic books work, finally. Stick to the successful comic book incarnations (and in this case, the tv series). Rather than be embarrassed by the comic background (which they shouldn't be; many of today's writers are the best in any medium) they portray it well, patching together different incarnations seamlessly (no gray Hulk, unfortunately, but it wouldn't have worked here anyway). Plenty of nods for the comic book nerds (there are a lot in this movie, and I'm not sure it's a good thing that I caught all of them).

One scene kids don't need to see (interrupted because Bruce can't get too excited). The images are too intense for my protected kids; children who see this stuff won't be phased (I saw a 5 year old after the movie that loved it; my kids would be completely freaked at twice her age).

Lynette would hate it. I really liked it, but Iron Man is better. Oh, you don't have to stay through all the credits. No easter egg.

It's not for kids, Juno

Juno was a quirky movie that I probably would have enjoyed more if my conscience wasn't watching it with me (AKA, my wife).

It isn't for kids, even though it makes some really great points (a co-worker called it a family film, but between subject matter, language, attitudes, and images, I wouldn't recommend it to pre-adults, and not all post-adults, either).

Well acted, quirky direction, weird music, and charming-if-profane people.

Sorry, Josiah.

Pet Irresponsibility Class

To avoid a 100 dollar fine, I enrolled for a Pet Responsibility Class with Orange County. 3 Hours long.

What a complete and utter waste of time. I'd initially thought, hmmm, maybe there are things I should know about like rabies shots, vaccinations, care and maybe training.

No, it was a film decrying our horrible society and it's hatred for animals. It condemned dog breeders and people who won't spay their pets. It discussed the stray problem and gleefully showed us animals being put down.

Then there was the PowerPoint show about animal bites in gory detail. It detailed extreme irresponsibility but didn't say a word about responsibility.

Sad.

27 Dresses

I was told by everyone that this was a great movie. And I suppose it was; good direction, good acting...

Maybe it's the prophet in me (the downside, not the upside) but liars get what they deserve. I don't like stories where all the problems are brought on by lieing (unless they're whoppers - a pathological liar is funny in a movie; their compulsion causes the problems despite themselves). In this, she's just a liar and at any time the problem can be solved by telling the truth; she isn't compelled to lie. Further, it's another movie where all the women besides the heroine is skanky.

Not as good as I was lead to believe. Juno is up next whenever I have time to watch it.

Dogs, pools, and work

Life is amazingly busy. I'm sitting on my pool deck about to get to some piling up work even though it's a saturday. Fortunately the pool is clean, the weather warm-and-not-too-hot, and my new puppy is lounging in the heat with me.

Of course, he's on the other side of the puppy fence that keeps him from going for an unplanned swim. Thunder is a rat terrier, known for their intelligence. This one is know for the springs in his legs. He leaps vertically - straight up with all four legs. He's not so bright that he's figured out the great outdoors are supposed to be his bathroom; he prefers rugs and behind my easy chair.

Sadly, I'm not posting because I have anything to say; I've just felt guilty about not posting for so long.

Much like the quantum physics question "if a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound?" I have to ask, "if a blog post has nothing meaningful, is it better than no blog post at all?"

Schrodinger's Cat wants to know...

HAPPY BIRTHDAY, BEN!

Yes, ladies and gentlemen, my oldest (and only) son, the sole possibility to carry on the 6 generation name of Swanson, turns 13 today. !!!!! A teenager! A young man! A scholar and a (mostly) gentleman! In Jewish culture back-in-the-day, he would be marrying soon!

More importantly, he's a young man his father and his Father can be (and ARE) proud of.

Happy Birthday, Ben!

Iron Man!

Flat out best Marvel Comics movie yet.

Despite the fact that I don't like Robert-not-an-honest-moment-Downy Jr. or Jeff-my-tongues-way-too-big-for-my-mouth-Bridges, they both rocked the house.

Spider-man's downfall was horrible casting of whiny-boy and not-beautiful-fashion-model.
X-Men's downfall was over-the-top characterization and dark-dark-dark tone.
Daredevil had major script problems.
Punisher was just flat bad in every way.
Ghost Rider was twisted.

Iron Man, perfect casting, spot-on characterization and well-balanced tone, with just a couple plot problems. Homerun. So good I want to see it again (especially because I missed the Easter Egg at the end of the credits).

Never a character I cared for - armor looks too uncomfortable - the movie made me wish I had a suit just like it.

The plot problems were more convenience cheats than anything else (the chest piece has a universal I/O port that fits into anything? Stane just so happens to have a tool that can remove it? He's an instant expert at the Titanium Man armor?) s'okay. Way good.

Caveat - An unfortunate scene in the beginning to establish Tony as a cad and some of the horrors of war make this not-a-kid's-movie (though you see far worse on TV these days).

Next: Iron Man 2 or Avengers?

Do cults serve God?

Or better put, is any religion better than no religion? From a purely sociological view, religious people are more moral and improve the community. They are happier (from a mortal perspective, not eternal) better citizens, better workers...

Your thoughts?

Of Deafness and Potato Chips

This is so weird.

I had to use a pile driver to chip out the tile in our bathroom. Very loud. As a result I felt (and still feel) like I have pounds of cotton stuffed in my ears. Everything sounds as if it's coming through walls.

So Ben and I return the pile driver to Home Depot and hit Subway for lunch. I open my bag of Lays Potato Chips and eat one. It tasted stale as if it wasn't crunchy. I had Ben try one to see if he thought it was stale. Nope, it wasn't. Because the crunchy sound was muffled in my suffering ears, it didn't feel crunchy. It felt WEIRD. Who knew?

I wonder what deaf people think of potato chips.

Deep thoughts at the Dentist

So I'm sitting cranked back in the dentist chair waiting, waiting, waiting.... I'm not wearing my glasses so I can't read any of the propoganda which means I had to just sit and think. I prayed for a bit, but admit I don't do that as well as I might, but it did lead to thoughts arisen from my last post (I know, the right word is "aroused" but nope, don't think so).

Faith. According to the Bible it is believing in what you hope for. But like the fellow who said to Jesus, "I believe, Lord, help me with my unbelief" I have to wonder if faith is sometimes acting on what you struggle to believe.

I don't struggle with disbelief in God. The resurrection must be believed if one is intellectually honest, and therefore I have no struggle with belief in the Son, His atoning work on the cross and arisen from the tomb.

I firmly believe that God is at critical work within our world and in each and every life.

Where I do struggle is believing in how I fit in to the whole thing. Why would God care about my prayers? How can my actions matter?

And yet I know they do. Odd that I know but struggle with belief. Faith is carrying through with what is true whether you believe or know or not. That is what I think the fellow means when he says "help me with my unbelief."

Nor do I think my "struggle" is a bad thing. Faith is fairly empty if one believes or knows fully. It's easy to inhale oxygen under normal circumstances, but there exists a highly-oxygenated water (made in a lab) that one can actually breath. It has yet to be experienced by a human, though. They hold a rat under until it "drowns" and takes a breath and finds it can breath. The next time, they still have to drown the rat - it "knows" it can't breath liquid (even though it can). People have TRIED to do it, but they always thrash their way out rather than draw liquid breath, and since it's not legal to hold someone under, it's never been tried. These people KNOW and BELIEVE they can breath it, but they do not have FAITH they can breath.

Interesting, huh?

Define...

Depression. What is it?

Is Biblical "flesh" spiritual?

When the Bible talks about "flesh" it means, oddly enough, just that. Our "meat." It's not some spiritual geegaw. The devil does not have claws sunk into it. Our flesh certainly moves us toward sin, but only ascetics thing flesh itself is evil. The five senses have no moral boundaries. If it tastes good, we want it. If it sounds good, we want it, if it looks good, we want it, if it feels good... well, you get the idea.

"Want" is okay. "Must have" not so much. "Five-sense-satisfaction instead of God" real bad.

God does not call us to eschew our senses, but to balance them. The ascetics on a mountain-top refusing all pleasant sensation are not hearing from God (a brief fast is good, an extended asceticism is a deprivation of what God happily gives us).

When we over-spiritualize the wisdom of the Bible we miss simple truths. I asked my class last Sunday what "flesh" is. They didn't know. They thought it was sin. Or a symbol of evil. Each of them thought when the Bible says "flesh" it has some other spiritual meaning.

We are flesh. Our glorified bodies will be of flesh. People have been, and eternally will be flesh. Our danger lay in choosing flesh over spirit.

Oh, Joseph, What Does My Dream Mean?

I dreamed myself a dream last night...

In the dream the Rapture (or something similar) occurred and Heaven's waiting room was a campground with a set of unstaffed administration buildings at the center (and rustic restrooms not far away). Mike Y. suggested going in and finding out what our real names were - the name God gave us when he created each of us. Seemed like a good idea so the Y's and Lynette and I went in where there were boxes and boxes of window envelopes. In each were a yellow card with our real names. M&M and Lynette found theirs easily, but instead of an envelope I had a bag a peanuts with a message tightly folded up in mine. Unfortunately, the note was wet and the ink had smeared to illegibility.

I woke up perplexed. What did the dream mean? Why was I left out? And then it dawned on me...

I was afraid of going to shell.

BWAHAHAAHAAAHAAAA! (real dream, no kidding)

National Treasure 2: Book of Secrets

I know it came out a long time ago, but it just recently came to the cheap theater which is the only place I can afford to take the whole family and not feel horribly guilty ($60 for a movie night is WAAAAAYYYYY too ridiculous).

So, okay, the movie. It was fun. A certain Sherlock suggested it was a lot like the first movie, but really, it wasn't. You remember how Disney used to put out sequels straight-to-video of their brilliant 2-D animations that they've so foolishly cast aside (the original, not the sequels). The originals were by top drawer talent and the sequels were done by the television third-rate pitchure draw-ers and felt like it.

Same with this movie. The scams were EFFORTLESS and EASY. They made it look like anyone could do it (the first movie was clever, this one was cheap). The actors were fun, the plot needed a re-write, the stakes were too low. If he had easy access to the president, why not just ask? Had they been bitter enemies, had the queen been in residence, had it just be harder and more risky instead of everyone seeming to be sleepwalking...

Nonetheless - apart from a truly bad hairpiece for Nick Cage - it was clean (even the ogling White House guy was mostly implied).

The elements were there; the execution was not... should have used the room behind Mt. Rushmore which was SUPPOSED to be a library but "never was." More real history bent to story purposes, higher stakes, and a better ticking clock is all they needed.

:)

So So

Goodness, the press had made hay out of a totally pragmatic response of VP Cheney's response to a reporter saying two-thirds of Americans don't think the Iraqi war is worth it. He said, "So?"

Probably not the most diplomatic response, but truthful? Yup. Until a time machine is invented, what we now think of a past action that is irrevocable should be "so what?"

We can't change the past. Now that we're there, we have no viable choice but to see it through. What should he have said? "I'm sorry" "that's too bad" "I'm not one of them?" No, none of those are effective responses because looking back is not what's called of leadership, looking forward is. Regret is not an executive quality. Perhaps that's the difference between Republicans and Democrats (or at least these Republicans and, y'know, those Democrats), the recognition that polls do not determine right or wrong or leadership.

"So" indeed.

Crosshatching

I don't know what they call it, but have you ever seen ice skaters do this odd figure-eight thing with their feet where it looks like their feet go through each other before moving away again? My brain does that a lot.

I was sitting here thinking about the presidential race and the dismal prospects ahead of us and I realized something. Most presidents are just standing in until a great one comes on the scene. Sure they may do some good, but that's what they're supposed to do. Some, like Carter, you have to be grateful they didn't completely destroy the world. Most, you have to hope they manage to keep the damage down to a minimum. I think we're due a great president soon. Certainly not in this race, probably not in the next two, but we're due soon. Washington was a great president. Then there were some good ones just standing in until Lincoln showed up (interestingly, he was an okay president his first time, then a phenomenal one his second term). After that we had some boozers and losers until Franklin Roosevelt hit the scene (a Democrat!). Then we had some primpers and sour fellows until Reagan came up. Since then we've had major disappointments... to be fair, GW Bush was a miraculous right man at the right time in his first term; kind of sad in his second...

Then my brain did the crosshatch thing.

I realized that that's descriptive of a man's life, too (and maybe a woman's, but I don't have first hand knowledge of that). Most of the time we're just standing in for ourselves, then there are moments or seasons in our life where we are great (invested unduly with the grace of God, no doubt). It's more obvious in some people's lives. A prolific writer, for example, where many of his books are just okay, but then suddenly the great one comes out. The one he was born to write and the others were just practice. Or perhaps a composer and his one or four songs out of two dozen. Or an athlete who puts it all together for a star performance just once.

There are some people who are great all the time (Spurgeon, Shakespeare, Di Vince) but for most of us there are golden moments but briefly... but, oh, those times are like lightening in a bottle. They may not be loud, or all that golden for others, but we know our own moments.

It's been awhile for me. I'm hoping I have a few left...

Talk about lazy...

I'm sitting in my easychair with my laptop in hand. Lynette is at her laptop in the other corner of the room. She's reading a funny e-mail and getting a real kick out of it. So I ask her to send it to me, which she does.

Now, I could have gotten up and gone the eight feet to look over her shoulder, but instead I have her forward it to me, which means the e-mail bounces out of the house, shoots through the network to Timbuktu and back to my house just a few feet from the originating computer. This doesn't cost any money, or slow down anyone's server. With all the traffic on the superhighway, this is less than a mote of dust on a scooter's windshield, but still, SOMEHOW, this is a waste of resources. For SOME REASON it would have been better for me to get up and walk the 8 feet.

But I didn't. And while I confess, I'm not so sure I repent...

Forever Young...

My oh my things are a-changin'

We have three kids in our sunday school class leaving for different states or churches. Home group seems very small all of a sudden. I was sitting there trying to imagine what the Cook group will be like without so many key players attending anymore.

Clearly, the Youngs may not go on vacation anymore. Forget about hosting it, with the exodus of the K's, M's, S's, and C's it is imperative that the Y's be there week in and week out. Imperative, I say. It's like a ship without an anchor, a camera without a flash, a sundae without chocolate.

(the official post missing the Youngs)