Of Birches and Rocks.

Tom Brown and his friend Rick, as children, loved to swing from birches. Their trunks and branches were long and strong and would bend under their weight.

One time Rick misjudged and was left hanging ten feet from the ground. “Jump, Rick!” I called and laughed. 

“No, too far!” He screamed. 

Stalking Wolf looked amused, but motioned me to climb the tree and help with my weight. I climbed farther on the trunk than I should have, and it broke. We both landed with a thud. I sprained my wrist. Rick hurt his pride. We both laughed. 

“You must always judge how far to go. Now you have ruined the birch” (p.83, Brown Jr., Tom. The Search. New York: Prentice Hall, 1980.).

You must always judge how far to go. Through experience and learning a man is someone who has learned how far to go before he damages others or his environment. This story is an excellent example. As youth, we often know no bounds. We play adventurously sometimes at the cost of others and our surroundings.

When I was probably around 12, I once went hiking with some friends. We rested at one point on the top of a small cliff. The cliff was made of cracked and loose stones. The cracks shaped the stones into sorts of spires. We discovered, to our delight, that if we pushed together with all out strength, we could knock these spires over and send the rocks crashing to the ground in great roars and bangs. We lost track of time as we fought to knock over spire after spire. It was great fun and great exercise. Finally, we continued on our hike leaving the cliff not so majestic, and the base strewn with broken rocks and battered vegetation.

I feel that we must forgive the innocence of youth. I’m not trying to excuse myself by saying that, but just as Tom recounts in his story: youth tend to not judge how far to go. I look back now and feel remorse for having destroyed in meaningless fun a beautiful creation of nature. But this is one of the growing and learning experiences that have taught me to step back and destroy less. There are limits.

A true man learns that just because he can destroy something, doesn’t mean he should. Nor does it mean he has the right to. He is someone who knows that one shouldn’t all the time run as fast, push as hard, fight as often, and eat as much as one can. He is learning just how far he should go. And that distinguishes him from a youth.

Learn from the Badger: Stand in Holy Places

“Aaron, Satan has no power if you’re not afraid of him. He becomes real through man’s fear and superstition. The bear is a large and ferocious animal, but he won’t attack a badger. Do you know why?

Aaron answered, “Because the badger is not afraid of him?”

“That’s right, and the badger also stays out of the bear’s way” (p.55, Brown Jr., Tom. The Search. New York: Prentice Hall, 1980.).

While there might be some room for discussion in what Tom means in the second sentence, I really love the lesson taught in this example. I think the most powerful part is the last line: that the badger also stays out of the bear’s way. Sure, if you are not afraid that counts for a lot. Having no fear is enough to scare and intimidate a bear. But if a badger does get into a fight with a bear, the bear will win. So what does the badger do? It avoids the bear!

Applying this to our life and Satan what do we learn? Not fearing Satan strips him of power. But if we do get in a direct fight, Satan will most likely win. That is just the way it is. So avoid the fight. Don’t EVER let Satan in. Don’t tease him or toy with him. You will lose, just as a badger against a bear. But, like the badger, the thought comes to mind: Stand ye in holy places (D&C 87:8). If we want to win the fight with Satan, why not just avoid the fight. Don’t go where Satan goes. Don’t be where Satan is. Surround yourself with light and have no fear.

Declaration of Study

There is in every eighteen-year-old boy the desire to face death. We all want to be tested. We all want to know for sure whether or not we are cowards or heroes, and our youth puts us at a disadvantage. We think the only way we can prove our manhood is through some life-or-death situation on the battlefield. It isn’t until we are more mature that we realize that manhood has little or nothing to do with physical prowess or cowardice, with our ability or inability to kill. Our manhood can be understood through our relation to the earth and its creatures; and survival is not to kill or be killed but to understand our place, our part in nature, and play it out (p.5, Brown Jr., Tom. The Search. New York: Prentice Hall, 1980.).

I have set the goal for 2013, at least the first half that is, to undertake several courses of study. I have wanted to study various topics for the last year or more and have never really put forth much effort. For the next six months I am going to see if I can actual study on a chosen topic and write about it, and apply it. If after six months I have actually progressed in my knowledge, then I will consider this a success.

What does this have to do with The Search and the quote? Well, good question. One of the three topics I have chosen to undertake is Manhood and heroism. The other two being Storytelling /Narrative Structure, and Spanish.

For years I have dabbled on the topic of manhood. I have read the occasional book, studied male roles as displayed in the Sunday Comics, and occasionally attempted to get in a fist fight to prove my strength and dominance only to quickly run away before my opponent gets off the floor and soundly pounds me. Ok, so I may be making some of that up. But the idea is conveyed: I have not taken the study seriously. As with Storytelling, I have always thought “Gee, sometime in the future I would like to learn more about this topic so that I am better versed in discussing it.” Only someday has never come. Well, someday no more my friends! I chose these three topics because they have been most on my mind of late and can clearly benefit me and my career. Now is the day. Carpe Diem and whatnot!

My first book of study on manhood is The Search. I love Tom Brown. He is one of my role models. His books greatly shaped my youth. I would sit captivated, listening to my Dad as he shared story after story of adventure in the wild as told by Tom Brown. And I thought, “these stories are great. And if Tom Brown is someone my Dad looks up too, then golly he can be someone I look up to.”

So what better place to start a course on manhood than the boy-man Tom Brown? And lo, five pages into the book is this incredible quote about manhood. Perfect! And he hits it right on. Manhood is so often portrayed as being physical. It is about the fight and struggle to survive, whether on the battlefield, on the street, in sports. A man is he who can kill the rest and be left standing, a king of the hill if you will. And I am tired of the that message being pounded into us. I am tired of the media asking why mass killings are on the rise while they glorify killing. As Brown points out, the world has got it wrong. Manhood has so much more to do with our relationships with each other, with creation, and with ourselves. A man is not someone who has killed and fought his way to victory. No, a man is someone who has conquered his inner demons and gained victory over himself. He is someone who understands the world and his place in it. He is not a killer. He is a defender of the sanctity of life.

Thank you, Tom Brown Jr., for getting that right and within the first five pages of your book.

June

What, it is the middle of June already? Where did the last month and a half go? No fear; despite what rumors you may have heard I am still quite alive. I'll post something soon...but then 'soon' is subjective and may mean another two months.

Government Broadband

Continuing the FCC theme from the prior post. I stumbled across a great article on ZDNet demonstrating a handful of negative effects of the FCC controlling cost and infrastructure of broadband. The following is an excerpt from that article by the David Gewirtz, the executive director of the U.S. Strategic Perspective Institute, founder of the ZATZ technical magazines, and the cyberterrorism advisor for the International Association for Counterterrorism and Security Professionals:

But there is a dark side. First, you gotta know that the minute FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski mentioned providing broadband to another 100 million DVD-buying-cause-they-can’t-watch-Hulu-yet Americans, some movie industry executives somewhere went full-goose bozo.

And that’s even before Julius mentioned those juicy upload speeds of 100 megabits per second. Can you say BitTorrent? Sure, I knew you could. Now, think about the FCC’s stated goal of “access to at least 1 gigabit per second broadband service to anchor institutions such as schools.”

In schools all across America, there will be armies of teenagers who’ll use their schools’ increased bandwidth to share every movie and every TV show ever digitized. After all, if it takes less than ten minutes to download a full-length movie, why not? Yes, I know, there’s software to prevent that. Do you seriously think any security software can stand up to an army of teenagers who want free movies?

Somewhere in Hollywood, an accountant in an overpriced suit just screamed into his latte.

Where else could this thing go off the rails?

Broadband For The Masses

The FCC is revealing its plan this week to use Stimulus money to upgrade our internet infrastructure. The problem: Too many people cannot access broadband internet. The plan will:

"provide high-speed Internet access to the estimated 93 million people in the U.S. without it. The plan, mandated by Congress last year as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, aims to increase home broadband use to 90 percent of the population by 2020 (Scientific American)."

The U.S., as of 2009, had 26.7 percent of the population on broadband. That is 81 million people were using broadband. The next closest country, in raw numbers, was Japan with 31 million. 90 percent would equal 245 million people with broadband. Comparing percentage of population (or penetration), the Netherlands had the highest percentage at 38 percent. But I don't need to tell you the population and land size differences in comparing our country to The Netherlands or even Japan. Our usage already trumps all other countries. Then what is the issue of access? Now, if it was faulty infrastructure, I could understand federal concern. If goats kept chewing through the cross-country trunk lines we would all agree that would be a problem. But the United States has no issue with goats. The FCC estimates that cable TV is accessible to 99 percent of the U.S. population. Cable broadband available to 96 percent. DSL 82 percent. If 96 percent of the nation already has the option, then why aren't more people using it and what exactly does the FCC mean by "access (all stats from OECD.org)?"



Obviously they don't mean connecting to broadband.

"The number one reason people cite for being offline is cost," Clyburn said. "Some might be in the position of having to choose between paying for basic necessities or paying for broadband, while others might not see the value of broadband relative to other things they could pay for like cable TV"(Scientific American)."

Those poor people; having to choose between paying for necessities or paying for broadband. How terrible. Cost is the issue: in FCC lingo "cost" must equal "access." Until two weeks ago, I too was one of the 93 million choosing not to use Broadband. I had no desire to pay the high rates. I chose to buy camping gear instead. Why is it suddenly a federal issue that I would rather spend my money buying some other product instead of broadband?


Are costs in the United States that bad? The average monthly bill is $45.52 putting us safely in tenth place for lowest monthly costs in the world. The world average is $51.55. Sounds like we don't have too much to complain about. Remember the Netherlands, which has the highest percentage of citizens on broadband? They are paying an average of $66.79 a month.


So why is it suddenly a national issue that we have nine countries paying a few dollars less than us for broadband? I don't know.

Instead of making people decide how to spend their money, the FCC wants to regulate the costs so we don't have to choose between cable TV or broadband internet. Or 60 inch TVs. Or speed boats. Or fast food. We can afford it all.

Sounds like a good idea; it has got me thinking: why stop with the internet? We all have access to roads. Most of us have a car to get around the roads on. But those who can't afford a car have access through public transit. And some of us splurge for sports cars. But we all have access to the roads. But you know, I'm sick of not driving a Ferrari like my rich neighbor. I'm also concerned that the penetration of Ferrari's is far higher in Italy than in the United States. And they are paying less. Why should I have to drive an old Honda so I can afford to buy food? Where do I live, some third world country? This is the 21st century. I don't think I should have to suffer like this. Not when I have to watch my hard working neighbor driving his Ferrari. And the people taking public transit should suffer no more. Where are their Ferraris? Imagine how wonderful the world will be when we all can travel in more style than any other country. I hereby declare Ferraris our right. Oh, and broadband internet.

Canon Mug

Now this is a cool advertising idea. Mugs designed to look just like a camera lens. How awesome is that? Someone over at Canon has a good sense of humor. You know, if you are going to give out and design swag, why not make swag that is your product? Everyone does hats and pens. Mugs are common to, but not mugs like these.

Review: Church History

Church History in Plain Language Updated 2nd Edition by Bruce L. Shelley


My rating: 4 of 5 stars
This was a long read. Its subject matter is rather dense: the history of the Christian religion from the time of Christ until now (actually late 1990's). It was suggested to me by my LDS World and Christian History teacher. I can see why now.

The chapters are kept short so you can read one a sitting without hassle. Shelley manages to provide a constant onslaught of names, dates, locations, and significances while interweaving stories and keeping it entertaining. I especially enjoyed the look at the 1900's to present and the growing onslaught of secularism.

View all my reviews >>

Iran and the Bomb

Reading Joel Rosenberg's book, Inside the Revolution, I came across this stunningly concise description of the likely fallout of Israel attacking Iran this year. They are trapped and threatened. They have no where to run:

Israeli leaders may, therefore, choose a strategy similar to the one their predecessors chose in 1967. In this case, they may launch a massive air and missile strike against Iranian nuclear facilities, air bases, missile launchers, air defense systems, and possibly government offices and critical infrastructure facilities before Iran has the opportunity to strike Israel first.

Such a move may prove necessary in the end, but it could also set the whole region on fire. Israel could face hundreds of incoming retalkiatory missiles from Iran as well as tens of thousands of incoming ballistic missiles and rockets from Syria, form Hezbollahin Lebonan, from Hamas in Gaza, and possibly from the West Bank, as well. Some of these missiles could be carrying chemical or biological warheads, even if the nuclear warhead in Iran were not in the picture. Ballistic missiles could also be fired from Iran at the oil fields in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States, at the oil tankers in the Persian Gulf and the strait of Hormuz, and at the U.S. bases and forces in Iraq. Thousands of suicide bomber cells could be activated in the region, particularly against Iraq and Israel. At the same time, sleeper terrorist cells could be activated in Western Europe, Canada, and the United States.

...Amid such global carnage and chaos, oil prices could soar to $300 a barrel or more. U.S. gas prices could spike to $10 a gallon or more, with horrific domestic and international economic repercussions. Worst of all, tens of millions of innocent civilians could be caught in the cross fire of a war they don't want but cannot prevent (p.17-18, Rosenberg).

Homeward Bound: Tetons Part 3

I stumbled back up and recovered my knife. I felt a surge of pride when I found it no worse for wear. Yep, that is a good knife. I’m sure we will have many more adventures together.

I scrambled down and down and down always avoiding the snow as much as possible. I had had enough with snow, falling, and icy water. I was exhausted but exhilarated that I had made if off the ridge without injury. I vowed to wear boots and not come alone next time. Doing this alone had been the most risky element of the entire hike. This entire time I was mostly far off trail and no one knew where I was or when to expect me back. Dumb, very dumb.

I made it to Delta Lake, finally, and while sunning myself on another rock, I called Dave Marcum and told him exactly where I was. If I didn’t text him when I arrived at my car, he knew where to send the rangers. He pulled up his map software and I recounted my tip as he followed my course. It was incredibly odd to be six thousand feet above the valley, tucked inside the range, and have flawless cell service with my buddy looking at a map and satellite images of my exact position. How many more years until those images are live?

The sun had sunk below the peaks and it was growing dark and cold. I attempted to navigate as best I could out of the basin and was relieved when I came across a thin, overgrown trail. I followed it down and around the crest of the mountain until it plopped me out of the ferns and onto the main trail. I must admit I was terribly glad to be on a simple, wide, trial again. I’d run out of water long ago, but still had a hearty supply of Starbursts and Granola bars. I munched on these until I drove into Jackson and got the biggest meal money could buy at Dairy Queen.

The end.

Onto the Cliffs: Tetons Part 2

Continuation from my trip to the Tetons in July 2009.

Crawling to my feet, I cautiously worked my way around the boulders, and then headed far up onto the scree where the snow ended. I was taking no more chances. I marmot barked out its displeasure as I climbed into its territory.

I circled the basin, maintaining my elevation above the lake for safety, and came to a large boulder blocking my way. Of course, I opted to climb over it instead of easily going around. It took two moves to get on top where I found myself suddenly face to face with the marmot. It looked completely surprised. Neither of us moved for a moment. It was close enough for me to have reached out and touched it. Realizing this, it grunted and shuffled away slowly. I pulled myself fully onto the top of the boulder and sat down. The marmot disappeared down a crack. But seconds later it popped its head out and watched me. Finally it climbed back out completely and we shared the warm rock together, mere feet apart.

I came across a trail, a real one carved into the wet soil, that led up to the saddle I was meandering towards. I had studied the map back at the hotel. I knew the other side was steep, but it looked passable enough.

The wind blasted me as I stood in the saddle and stared nervously into the next valley. The pass was not just steep, it was cliffs. Better yet, icy cliffs.

I followed the trail as it wound treacherously along one cliff top then the next. At this point there were trees to cling to. But the treed slopes quickly thinned to solid cliff. I’d be lying if I didn’t admit I thought of turning back on many occasions. But back was now a long fight up. Besides, I’d come up that way and below me lay an unexplored, untouristed basin. And you know how I love to explore…

I lost the trail. There were no markings on the solid rock, and the footprints in the snow were very intermittent. Somehow I shimmied down a crack and along a rapidly narrowing ledge I sincerely thought was the trial, well, possibly…until the ledge ended in a wet curving slope that then dropped ten feet to another wider ledge. Yeah, this definitely wasn’t a trail. Again, I could turn back, try and shimmy up the crack without protective climbing gear, or I could tempt fate by climbing down. There were no clear holds close by, but an nice series out a ways on the cliff face. The ledge below was wide, and not too far down. I really hate backtracking…so I jumped for the holds. I made it easily, but my shoes couldn’t register and I gave up quickly and lowered myself with my arms. I caught my breath, trembling slightly, on the wide ledge. How did I end up stuck on a cliff in an area where very few people ever come?

Luckily this ledge networked with others and I find myself on the trail again. As I followed it I quickly realized it had no intention of weaving down into the basin and to the lake below. It maintained its elevation high on the ridge wall, skirting the basin up to the glacier that rests below the Grand Teton. I was not where I wanted to be. I was on the trail to summit. The snow was packed and my shoes couldn’t dig in enough to keep my footing. I slipped several times. The slope of the snow was by far the steepest I had ever tried to tackle. I was still high enough up to be very nervous and there were obvious cliffs below me if I slid far enough, which on this slope I figured I would. But how do I get down off this infernal wall? I cursed myself for not wearing my better hiking boots; I was in my old flimsy cross trainers. I cursed myself for mocking summiteers with all their gear. I had been one to state loudly that the guide books said you could summit the Tetons without ropes or axes. It is not that tough…and I was still on non technical terrain.

But walking the slope now, I realized the handiness of such items. My pulse was racing and I was sweating from the tension. Every step might send me to a fateful drop. If I had an axe and some crampons, oh man, that would be heaven. How did I get into this type of snow and ice with totally inadequate footwear?

However, I did have my SOG knife which I quickly unsheathed. It was dangerous, but it could bite into the snow and hold me when I slipped.

My plan was to continue along until the cliffs safely ended and the slope lessened as the basin curved.

Even stepping where others had trod, the slope was too much. I made my way, my knife digging in and holding me several times. One time, however, I lost both my feet. I hung from my knife as I clawed at the snow with my other hand and kicked with my legs. The knife suddenly gave way. I shot downward. I spun onto my back and thrust the knife into the snow. It skipped across the surface; I was moving too quickly for it to penetrate. Below me, and coming up fast, the snow ended far sooner than I would like. With both hands I frantically worked the knife. I was able to dig the blade in and keep it in. The torque on the handle was incredible and it was all I could do to keep the knife from twisting out of my grip. Between my heels and the knife I slowed quite nicely. But not before the snow stopped. Suddenly I was sliding along rocks and dirt. The knife scraped and caught stone and skittered out of my hands. I actually laughed at this point. I was moving slowly, but the slope was so steep that even out of the snow I could not stop myself. It is amazing how, even moving so slowly across rock, momentum can keep 165 pounds from stopping. When I noticed the drop off below me, I stopped laughing. I clawed at the rocks and focused on jamming my feet into anything that would stop me. By the time I reached the cliff I was moving at a crawl. I had time to think “No, no, no, come on, no!” before momentum carried me over the edge. I dropped…three feet. It was actually perfect: I was able to just put my legs down and stand up. I ran another fifteen feet down the increasingly grassy incline and finally stopped against a large rock.

I was finally off the cliffs and free of the snow. I was shaking badly, but was laughing. What a rush. That had been crazy fun—well, perhaps just crazy. My hands throbbed and were bleeding badly from hundreds of little scrapes and cuts. I was relieved to have sustained no knife wounds.

I looked up at my path. Now, this all happened much quicker than you can ever read. This whole episode may have taken ten seconds. I had slid about forty feet in the snow, another fifteen on the rock and dirt, and then the ledge. God’s hand was immediately evident. The drop off was three feet where I went over it. Five feet to the side, down slope, it was eight feet. And it quickly grew to about thirty or more feet as it pulled out of the scree slope and the basin descended to the lake still far below me. Sliding any time earlier would have so easily ended very poorly.

I stumbled back up and recovered my knife. I felt a surge of pride when I found it no worse for wear. Yep, that is a good knife. I’m sure we will have many more adventures together.

Into the Water: Tetons part 01

From my trip to the Tetons in July 2009.

I gasped; not only because the water was freezing, but also because there was water. I had supposed I was safe on the shore. Apparently I was on ice and had just punched one leg through. The lake was larger than it looked, swaddled in snow as it was. I pulled my leg out, stood up, and scrambled further away from the lake.

The sun was high over head, the weather was warm, and I had Amphitheater Lake all to myself. It was beautiful and peaceful, but not the ideal time to fall into ice covered lake. The friendly ranger with his tour group had left only minutes before, but were doubtlessly out of hearing range. I had a three mile hike off the Tetons to get back to my car. I preferred to do it without hypothermia.

Not far from the lake, starting to climb the ice covered talus slope, I came across a well defined path going around the lake. The footprints had melted in the sun forming a shapeless rut in the deep snow. Not far along, the path curved around some larger boulders taking me closer to the lake than I liked.

At the exact time I wondered if this was actually a trail or if it could really be a seam that—I fell through the ice again. In the split second of hesitation as my body started to plummet straight down I instinctively threw myself backwards and spread my arms. Having no footing, I didn’t get much backward motion, but enough to slam my backpack into and catch the edge of the hole I had broken in; and with my arms I effectively stopped my fall. I let out a laugh: I had caught myself. Then I felt the cold gripping both my lower legs. I stopped laughing and immediately pulled myself out of the hole and rolled to the side. Looking in, I was still over the lake which was three feet below the snow. Both my legs to mid calf were soaked. The path I had been following was indeed merely a crack from shifting ice that had a foot or so of snow over it. I had foolishly been walking on the weakest part I could possibly walk on without realizing the danger.

Laying in the sun, shivering, still very alone, I pondered on the many warnings I’ve heard about crevasses in glaciers. Crevasses are giant cracks throughout a glacier. They can be wide as a road, or so narrow that snow easily drifts across obscuring the crack completely. They are the most dangerous threat to mountaineers; one wrong step, a quick plummet, and then a crunch of broken bones and a slow death. I’ve been warned to avoid walking in fresh snow. When on a glacier, stick to the dirty packed stuff.

Well, lesson driven home, I’d say. This was a humorous and relatively nonthreatening way to have that point demonstrated.

Crawling to my feet, I cautiously worked my way around the boulders, and then headed far up onto the scree where the snow ended. I was taking no more chances. I marmot barked out its displeasure as I climbed into its territory...

To be continued...

Right and Wrong and Free Speech

I came across this today which amazingly continues on the theme of my Right and Wrong post. This is from an article in response to Obama's U.N. Anti-Free Speech resolution; as USA Today stated "the Obama administration has joined a U.N. effort to restrict religious speech." From the John Birch Society, "It has been pretty clear that the Obama administration does not look with particular favor on the second amendment, but it is also becoming increasingly evident that the President is not much of a ‘fan’ of the first one, either...The Obama administration has marked its first foray into the UN human rights establishment by backing calls for limits on freedom of expression."

Apparently, Obama described the measure as a method to stop blasphemy and to protect religion. Yet why, world wide, are people being persecuted for saying "homosexual," being "anti-gay," by classifying disagreement with abortion as "hate speech," etc? These things may show intolerance, but they do not deal with religion or blasphemy.

So what is the common thread running through all these speech prohibitions? The standard being applied is not one of blasphemy.
It is offensiveness.

Thus, what’s happening here is not religious but quintessentially secular. After all, blasphemy is predicated on the idea that external, universal, unchanging laws (God’s laws, the Truth) dictate that certain things really are sacred and that we must respect them, that we must, in a manner of speaking, avoid “offending” God. Yet [they] are only concerned about offending man. And in making “man the measure of all things,” they are guilty of a typical atheist mistake. That is, if there is no Truth (a notion that reduces morality to opinion) who is to say it’s wrong to offend people?

Moreover, making man god and then saying “Thou shalt offend no god” is far scarier than anything Mideastern Imams conjure up. This is because blasphemy prohibitions are actually fairly limited, only pertaining to impious utterances relating to a certain religion. Yet, since the secularists are using that which “offends man” as the yardstick, and since man comprises thousands of groups the world over, there conceivably is no limit to the number of speech prohibitions such a standard could spawn (Selwyn Duke).

Obama says he is stopping blasphemy, but his blasphemy has nothing to do with God. Looking at his war on Fox News, Obama seems to define blasphemy as anything that contradicts him. He has out rightly attacked Fox News, attempting to stop their reporting. The other major news agencies, having watched the circus the last few weeks, have finally banded together with Fox.

Now, I know all the articles I have quoted are extremely conservative. I apologize for that. I actively sought for a balanced perspective on this UN Free Speech discussion. Shockingly, none of the larger media other than Fox have touched this; but it is moving like wild fire on the smaller sites and blogs. And obviously my support for an eternal Right and Wrong only comes from conservatives. As Selwyn Duke put it:

An atheist would say that religionists' reasoning is based on a silly assertion; namely, that the divine exists. I won’t argue that here but will only say that the secularists’ offensiveness-based speech laws are silly regardless of the facts. After all, while secularists’ relativism dictates nothing can be wrong, they claim it’s wrong to offend others. They also claim nothing can be sacred but yet would have us treat certain people’s feelings as sacred.

They just don't make sense...

Right and Wrong and Math

Here are the principle points of People’s Law as practiced by the Anglo-Saxons…[point number three] The laws by which they were governed were considered natural laws given by divine dispensation, and were so well known by the people they did not have to be written down (5000 Year Leap, p 13).

It is interesting how the more I read about the Constitution and early US Government, the more I hear about Natural Law. Our Founders, and the majority of people at the time, believed in Natural Law which, simply and roughly put, is God’s unalterable Law. It is a divine, eternal right and wrong. Today, Natural Law has been erased almost completely. Modern dogma states that there is no way to know absolutes, and it is inappropriate to judge others by your belief. In example, why is homosexuality wrong if there is no eternal law on sexual reproduction? Why is anything wrong, for that matter? Who said cheating, or lying, or stealing, or killing is wrong? If not God then society. You may say, “but I make up part of society, and I really see no reason for those things to be wrong. And why deny physical desire? I want it now. Who came up with abstinence, tolerance, patience? If not God then society; my friends and I say ‘wait no more.’ In the words of Better Than Ezra, ‘If it feels good, do it. If it tastes great, drink’ (Teenager).”

I feel the battle in our society is not whether this or that is right or wrong, but whether there is right or wrong. If there is no wrong, then whatever the majority desires is correct. However, if there is no wrong, there is no right. No right, no good; no good, no bad.

This argument just seems ludicrous to me.

Abraham Lincoln said, "When I do good, I feel good; when I do bad, I feel bad, and that is my religion." Why did he feel good when he did good or bad when he did bad? Why do you? For that matter, why does charity and service exist in the world at all? Why does the general populous not lie, steal, and kill? It makes no sense for us not to do any and everything we can to get gain. So there has to be something more at play here. Example: if the government stopped punishing murder, that would not suddenly make man, woman, child, willing to go out and kill. Yes, I’m confident the murder rate would soar. But I believe that those increased murders would be primarily committed by the same few who now kill. The majority would still be horrified at the idea of taking life. Why is that so, if there is no absolute right and wrong?

I find solace in mathematics. In math, there are rigid laws set in place that function under all conditions and through all time. As you undoubtedly know, 1 + 1 can only equal 2. It did so six thousand years ago. It does so today. It will tomorrow. Saying there is no absolute right and wrong, no Natural Law, is like saying the natural law of math allows for 1 + 1 to equal 2, 3, 271, or whatever the public majority feels like this certain year. ‘Who are you to say that it equals 2 and all the rest of us are wrong for saying it equals 271?’



This argument is far larger than I care to make at this point; far larger, in truth, than I have yet thought out. But it seems to me that since there is a law that clearly states mathematically that there is a right and there is a wrong, and that law is the foundation of everything in our existence, then it seems odd to ignore its implication in human interaction and ethics. It was the mathematical law that allowed the Egyptians to build the pyramids. It is this same law that today thrusts humans into the void of space. It is this same law that dictates the decoding of DNA and the formation of cells within us. It is the same law that shows when, say, chemicals inhaled from cigarettes reach a certain threshold, a chain reaction occurs within the body. Or that cells die in the absence of oxygen after so much time. It also dictates the formation of planets, the movement of their paths, and the fusion in stars.

The natural law of mathematics is the basis of everything and it empirically points out the validity of absolute rights and wrongs.

Our nation was built upon Natural Law, despite what the prevalent thought de jour may claim. On July 4th, 1776, Congress declared that they were “to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them,” (Declaration of Independence, para 1). Again, who said there is wrong and there is right? Who said that free sex, drugs, and killing babies is wrong? If not God, then who? Our founding fathers knew these things were wrong. Just as the 1776 congress and Lincoln, I surmise that when I do good, I feel good and that Natural Law decrees it; just as 1 + 1 equals 2.

Brain Magic

Watching TED today I came across this presentation. It blew my mind. I know, that is not too hard to do. I am easily distracted like most -- SQUIRREL!

Sorry, where was I? Oh yeah. I love magicians, especially humorous ones. Keith is great and his skits and novel and engaging. He shows "you all how easy it is to manipulate the human mind once you know how."

Boy. It is easy to be decieved. Try out his first skit with him and see for yourself.

Federal Reserve Not Tracking Spending

This is a great clip on the status of oversight at the Federal Reserve. The first two minutes are a little slow but ramp up quickly after 1:56. This is crazy.

Censor No More

The Internet and technology in the last fifteen years has revolutionized communication. Instead of the classic model where a few media moguls with their million dollar transmitters deciding what is and isn't news, the internet gave you and me the power to decide. We are no longer limited with what New York Times believes is sensational, or what our own local papers report. The internet allows us to search and read from media sources around the world. Better yet it, allows us to bypass the media centers entirely and go straight to the sources. And most incredible: it is instantaneous. Better still, technology is becoming more and more mobile, allowing us to create the news and share it immediately with the world. Look at me. I am typing this on my laptop on a train. You can read it as soon as I publish. How long is it until real time connections allow you to read as I type? Perhaps a sort of Facebook Skype hybrid of absolute real-time connection? Not far off I imagine.

So now to the title of this post.

The following video is linked to the TED talk by Clay Shirky, entitled "How cellphones, Twitter, Facebook can make history." This is an incredible talk on this topic. Let the video load and jump to 6 min and 50 sec. China was helpless to stop the mass broadcast of last year's earthquake from its survivors. In fact, the earthquake was twittered as it happened, minutes before the the US Geological Survey announced it. BBC, the first to break the story, got the news from Twitter.

At 13 min and 40 sec is a great story about Obama and Censorship. Well. The whole thing is great if you have the time to watch it.

Nature Photography: One View

Why do I not always take my camera with me when hiking and camping? I have often said that I do not bring a camera with me because I do not want to be distracted. When I start taking photos, I stop seeing what is around me. I start seeing it as numbers and composition. As in, instead of a wonderful flower moving gently in the breeze with radiant orange pedals delicately ribbed, I just look at the black frame around the flower, it position, and the numbers on the side telling me exposure, shutter, and aperture. I am no longer seeing the flower. I no longer smell it, or feel that indescribable sensation of actually being with, and experiencing, a beautiful flower. I see its form through the lens of the camera but the flower is removed from all contexts and becomes flat. It has already become a photograph as soon as I look through the lens, even before I push the button and capture the light. And the question is: is it better to look at photographs or to actually be there? Dumb question. I doubt there is anyone who will say photographs are just as fulfilling as the real thing. Does a girl thrill at receiving a photograph of roses? They are not the same. We all know that.

So when I am hiking and camping, do I want to spend my time looking through the viewfinder at detached, flat images, or do I want to put the camera away and actually be there?

This becomes an argument of whether it is better to capture ‘memories’ for future use and pleasure, or to fully drink in the moment so that in the future you have better ‘memories’ of the experience? Maybe, just maybe, we have such a hard time remembering past experiences because we were never fully there. How do you remember something you did when your mind was wandering elsewhere? All of us have experienced a wife or a mother talking to us while we were thinking on something else only to have her ask us to respond and we have no idea what she is saying. Are we walking through the forests but not hearing what they are saying?

I can tell you Tom Brown’s view. Each time I step from my car and into the mountains his words are with me. Leave all distractions behind and live this moment. To do otherwise you are robbing yourself of the beautiful experience. You must give up past and future concerns. The past and the future are illusions. They do not exist. All you have is now. So why not be present now?

For most of us, it seems, Saturday is a mad rush to get to our wilderness destination and Sunday is a mad rush to get back. Very little time is actually spent being there. Very little time is spent experiencing…In the “now,” you have no past or future, and everything is experienced freshly. A person without a past has never seen a tree, a mud puddle, or a blade of grass. A person without a future is free of worries and fears and open to whatever may cross his or her path (p.18, Guide to Nature Observation and Tracking ©1983 Berkley).

The motive for the photography comes into question. Am I photographing because the moment and the object are just so perfect that I cannot resist? Is the act of photography furthering my experience of “now?” Or am I asking the following questions: Am I going to remember this? Do I have enough photos for when I get home? Will my friends be entertained and impressed?

If those are my thoughts, then I am wasting my time now and capturing empty photographs for tomorrow. So when friends ask me why I, a photographer, am not bringing my camera along on this hike, I respond that I have stored up enough ‘memories’ for tomorrow and would prefer to actually make some memories today.

Moab Part II

I was to meet with Dan at noon in Moab. Until then I explored around where I was, just north of Arches. I drove up a rough, steep, and very narrow road to the top of the opposing plateau. I hiked around and generally had a good time. Back down at the base of that road there was a mine dump tucked in a narrow canyon. I explored several miles along the plateau. Finally I found a real mine entrance that was still open. I climbed in and walked down the sloping, wide tunnel. It was pretty nifty. I went until the light of the entrance faded. That was far enough to ascertain that it was a good mine for exploration. It wasn’t merely a prospect. One should never go into a mine alone, so I turned back towards the dim light and hustled out of the blackness. As soon as I had my back towards the unexplored mine, and my face to the entrance, I felt really creepy. It was eerie being alone in total blackness without knowing what was really behind me. I could imagine Gholem sneaking up on me and slitting my throat.

Dan Sunderland didn’t show up at noon. In Moab I had cell phone service and discovered that Dan had slept in. He would be to Moab at around 6pm. That was the same time his friend Matt was arriving from Provo.


With the day suddenly free and still alone, I drove into Arches and decided to explore. I hiked Park Avenue. The wind was whipping on the ridge and the clouds had thickened to dark gray hulks. The hike is only a mile one way, but that distance in the wind and the threatening rain was enough to keep most of the visitors out. I held onto my hat as I stood with the masses at the panoramic overlook. I smiled at them and then descended into the canyon. I was virtually alone. The few people that did pass were German and French.


I then drove over to Devil’s Garden. I wanted to make the full four mile circle before I had to return and meet the guys in Moab. I walked along the trail stopping at arch after arch. People were all around me, again more of the French and Germans. They were all very pleasant, but I felt like I was at the zoo instead of in the wilderness. I don’t like being herded along on neat trails and unable to step off and explore at will.

The trail ends at Landscape Arch and the Primitive trail (meaning unpaved) begins. The trail climbs directly up a steep fin of rock. Most people don’t venture past the end of the pavement so there I left the other tourists behind and found the sense of wilderness I desired.

The wind picked up. It was terribly powerful and knocked me about on several occasions. Sand got everywhere: my eyes, ears, nose, and camera.

I was at the far end of the loop, half way of the entire circle trail, when I checked my watch. It was 5pm. I had been walking for two hours. I thought to myself, Dang, two hours for two miles? Those were two hard miles! I rushed through the rest of the trail and didn’t see a single person until I got back to the paved trail. It turns out that the Devil’s Garden loop is eight miles, not four. Oops.

Moab part 1

June 4, 2009

Amid scattered rain I departed from ARUP and headed for Moab. I left early hoping to make good time and get to my camp site, just north of Arches, to watch the sunset...

I have been driving at this point for four hours. I have been mulling over whether or not to go to Costa Rica with Ryan and Amy.

We are creatures of habit. We create routines and stick to them forming ruts in the world surrounding us. We drive the same roads, eat at the same restaurants, shop the same stores, amuse ourselves with the same activities day in and day out. All the while we crave something new. We dream of foreign lands and adventure to alleviate our boredom. Yet we have no idea what lies one block away from our house.

What is driving these thoughts, and my current trip, is a desire to explore and discover. I want to see and experience new and foreign things. This desire is both for the external as well as the internal: to go new places and explore lands and cultures as well to do things that confront and push my personality and mind from their hazy comfort zone.

This desire can be satiated without spending thousands of dollars and traveling to distant countries. Yes, I am driving on the right side of the road and still speaking English. (Well, except for at Carl’s Junior when I ordered my hamburger.) I am still in Utah. I haven’t even left the jurisdiction of my local government. But I am driving down a road I have never driven before. I am going to Arches, a singularly unique wonder that I have never seen in the 20 years I have lived here. These experiences are new. All of this adds up to a sense of exploration of a foreign land. I am not in Costa Rica, no, but I am where I have never been before and that is what truly counts.

I am enjoying this. This is foreign to me.

I think the desire for something new can be easily lived by each one of us just by stepping outside of our boundaries and going someplace new; even if only an hour away — even if only around the corner. Doing that, we can explore things foreign to us and have adventures as often as desired. It is within our power. And it is cheap.