Darwin

In my week 13 text response blog, I will be responding to article by Ben Stein entitled Florida’s Darwinian interlude. The column is about how the state of Florida was suggesting passing a law mandating that only Darwinian type teachings could be taught in the schools. I personally believe that the suggestion of this is a bit absurd. I believe that is how the whole creationism versus evolution argument started in the first place. To suggest that only one type of scientific theory should be taught, limits the advancement of education. Darwin’s theories are not infallible, and science will always be making new discoveries. We have to believe that there are young scientists right now looking to do what Darwin did nearly 150 years ago. If we tell the scientific community that there are no other theories taught in the classroom, then that might be as close minded as simply teaching creationism. We must always be willing in our public schools to expand student’s minds. And to do that, we must have the ability to teach the most groundbreaking discoveries. Despite what you may think about Darwin, this is about the principle of education. Professors and teachers are on the front lines helping mold the next generation of physicists, engineers, and doctors. They must be allowed to be progressives and they cannot be held back by a group of bureaucrats.

Fired Up

For this week’s free choice blog, I am going to write about a local business that I experienced for the first time yesterday. First, I should mention that my daughter, Emily, is visiting from New Jersey this week, so we have been looking for activities to do. She is 7, and unfortunately all of the kids her age are in school this week because the Spring Break here was in mid-March. So, we were in Peoria, and decided to head over to Peoria Heights to check out a place called Fired Up. It’s a little shop that features ceramics that you can paint any way you like, and then they will fire in their kiln. There is a small sitting fee ($8 for adults and $5 for children), and you simply pay for the ceramic pieces that you choose to paint. Emily chose a large egg to decorate with paint, and I picked a coffee mug. I actually don’t drink coffee much, but I could always use it as a pencil holder or similar desk top item. In any event, it was a relaxing way to spend a Tuesday afternoon, or at least, as relaxing as you can get with a 7 year-old painting. There are plenty of paints to choose from, and the ladies at the shop can show you different techniques to decorate your art. There was even a cute little Birthday party for a little girl going on while we were there. To my surprise, the shop was actually a little busier than I thought that it would be considering it was Tuesday, therefore they said that they recommend reservations on the weekends. So if you are looking for a tranquil way to spend an afternoon or evening, consider a trip to the Heights and check out Fired Up.

Product Placement: who cares?

In my week #11 text response blog, I will examine the issue of product placement advertising in movies and television. In Chapter 14 of our text, they show a screencap from the TV show 30 Rock in which the characters are seen in a McDonalds. The producers claim that they were not paid for this appearance, but it looks as though it could be deliberate. It does beg the question: can the American TV viewer discern the difference between paid and unintentional product placement? And do they care?

We live in a branded world. Brands are everywhere. Some we are proud to display, some not so much. If someone had a camera on me right now, they would see that I am drinking a Coke Zero while clicking on my Toshiba laptop, and wearing a Reebok hoodie. Unfortunately, I am not being paid by any of these companies. However, in recent years product placement has begun to really invade movies and television, especially movies. Some are subtle, but some are obvious. For example, in the movie Castaway, Tom Hanks’ character works for Fed Ex, which has its image in many scenes of the movie. It seems to be a bit ironic product placement considering that a Fed Ex plane crashes in the movie.

My personal opinion is that subtle product placement is tolerable. It seems too contrived when every mention of a product is a fictional one. Sometimes, the brands will have to be shown. It is impossible to shoot a scene in Times Square without many brands shown in lights. So, the characters should be able to eat in a McDonalds without a high level of scrutiny. The Golden Arches are nearly impossible to avoid, and TV characters should be able to eat there if they want to seem believable.

 

 

Being a Cubs fan

As the warm weather approaches, it is time to begin another baseball season. In many cities across America, there is hope that the hometown team can possibly have a winning season and make a run deep into October. Unfortunately for Chicago Cubs fans, there is not as much optimism, at least for the 2014 season. I am one of those fans. And I will remain a Cubs fan for my entire life, because being a Cubs fans isn’t about championships (Thankfully!), it’s about loyalty and charm.

Even after reading in my Sports Illustrated Baseball preview issue that the Cubs are predicted to lose 100 games this season, I watched on Opening Day hoping to see a win. A 1-0 loss in 10 innings was the outcome, and I had to shake my head. This may be how this season goes. I hear that they have a good farm system in place, and maybe in 2015 or 2016, they could be contenders. Until then, I will still watch and cheer for my team. Because as a Cubs fan, you know, this is a lifetime commitment.

Loyalty runs deep in Chicago’s North side. Fans will still flock to Wrigley Field wearing their favorite jersey expecting to see a win. Add to that, one of the most charming seats in all of baseball. The charm of Wrigley Field has no bounds, and most sports fans agree that there is nothing like a sunny afternoon in the bleachers, holding a beer, and sitting right above the green ivy. Except maybe for a Cardinals fan.

The Cubs will always be my team, and even when I lived in New Jersey for 8 years, I had no problem telling everyone that I will always be a Cubs fan. I’m not going to suddenly start cheering for the stinkin’ Yankees or Mets. We went to see the Cubs whenever they were in Philadelphia, and I was pleasantly surprised to see how many Cubs fans were there. Even when spending the night in a Philly hotel one time after a Phillies/Cubs game, the entire hotel bar was filled with Cubs fans. There was even a good share of cars with Illinois license plates. This shows how well the loyal Cubs fans travel.

I know that this may not be our year, but I will still watch with enthusiasm. I will gripe when there is a bad call, and yell when they give up a homer. Maybe these young Cubs may be the start of something great. But, there is always next year.

Six years or a Lifetime?

          Many people say that you should never talk politics or religion. In this week’s text response blog, I will be breaking one of those rules. After reading the article “Bailout Politics”, I saw the very common Washington D.C. rhetoric. We messed up and caused a problem, but now let us fix it. Maybe, this is the problem in our nation’s capital. We trust that long-term politicians, regardless of party, will make decisions that are in our country’s best interests. But could they simply be acting in their own best interests? Could they be only seeking re-election? Or possibly to reward people who have given them favors in the past? This is why I am a big supporter of term limits for Congress.

            When the Constitution was ratified, I believe their intention was to create a government which was comprised of citizens who wanted to serve their country after an established private life. Instead, we have many public servants who only have experience as politicians. For example, Eighteenth District Congressman (IL) Aaron Schock has only been in politics since his graduation from Bradley University in 2002. I’m sure that he is an intelligent man, but he has been afforded the benefits of being an elected Congressman virtually his entire adult life. I doubt that he can truly empathize with the struggles of the average working person. Mr. Schock is only one example, and we don’t have to look very far to find him.

            I feel that people in Congress should be limited to six years. Three terms for the House and one term for the Senate are reasonable limits to serve our country. This may begin to limit the cronyism that infects Washington. There is nothing wrong with going to D.C., try to help our country, and then going home to resume your family life. Maybe if they weren’t always looking to the next election, they could possibly make decisions that make our country better.

Writer's block

           So, I am dealing with some serious writer’s block this week. I’m not sure if it is because my first writing project is almost finished, but I’m struggling to come up with a subject. I probably could come up with something rather easily, if I just wanted to gripe about a topic. But I don’t want to waste all of my free choice weeks by complaining about something. It’s week #8, btw. Ironically, I was one who lobbied for the blog as a bigger part of our grade because I thought it would be easy to write a blog entry each week. I guess it is easier said than done.

 

            It gives me a new found respect for bloggers. Now, obviously not every blog is a gem, but there are some very good ones out there. Some bloggers even find a way to turn their hobby into a full-time, paying job. And any job that you can do while wearing Hello Kitty sweatpants is a good one. Plus, the best thing is you can find a topic that interests you and connect with other people who feel the same way. I remember back in my stay-at-home Dad days, I found a blog where this lady was going to use a different crock pot recipe, every day for a year. It takes a lot of creativity and research to come up with 365 crock pot techniques, and make them interesting. People blog about their life, kids, hobbies, or basically anything that is interesting to them. Informational or cathartic, it all depends on why you chose to start or where it takes you.

The iWorld? Thank God….oh, and Steve Jobs

In this week #6 text response blog, I will critique an article by Andrew Sullivan entitled, “Society Is Dead: We Have Retreated into the iWorld. My response: Give me a break! Seriously. And this isn’t the first time that I have heard this narrative lately. It’s usually from someone of the older generation, and it’s always the same argument. “These kids can’t communicate anymore because they are always focused on their phones.” It could be a sensible contention, but maybe communicating is exactly what they are doing. A teenager that sends 2000+ texts per month is obviously keeping in touch with a lot of friends, or in the least, one really great friend.

As far as society goes, do we really have a responsibility to be ready to chat with anyone who crosses our path, at the drop of a hat? Aren’t we entitled to have some time alone with our thoughts without being disturbed? I feel that my morning commute is a great time to listen to music in my car and get ready mentally for my day. However, if a person doesn’t have a car and they must use public transportation, then aren’t afforded that luxury. I’ve taken enough Chicago to Newark flights to know that most people want to be left alone and have their personal space. You don’t want chatty Cathy in the next seat.

I understand the inability to accept this new generation’s dependence on technology. But it’s here to stay, and it’s time to accept it. Would someone have the same aversion to a person who had their nose in a Steinbeck novel on the subway? Probably not. But we automatically assume that the person’s iPod has some sort of dreadful music playing. Nickelback or Creed, perhaps? Maybe the person is listening to Beethoven, or quite possibly, that Steinbeck on Audible. Ultimately, it’s up to the person to decide how we use technology.

If Mr. Sullivan feels that we have slipped into a cyber-world, he can certainly take out his earbuds and close his laptop on his next flight. United has a non-stop flight from Chicago to Beijing, and I’m sure his neighbor will have no problem testing his theory. It’s a 14 hour flight. Good luck with that.

My Philosophy class

Considering that we only have a free choice blog every other week, there are certainly a few different topics that I could rant about this week. Cold weather, potholes, and bad drivers in snowy weather are definitely finalists, but I decided to rave about something that we are doing in one of my other classes.

In my Philosophy 112 class, we watched a movie, and then each of us had to give an oral presentation about a different aspect from the movie. The class is Comparative Religion, so there were many different types of religious themes in the movie. The presentation would count as our Midterm. So, each of us had to reach into an envelope, and pick out a question at random. We were given the option to trade questions with other classmates if we chose.

It has been very interesting watching all of the presentations the last few days, especially since mine has already been done. I like to see what each person’s take on the movie is, and what type of creativity they may bring to the class. I chose to do a Powerpoint, one girl used cut-out pictures of the characters to illustrate her point, and even one made a video of herself at home and played it for the class. Our instructor has been very liberal about how they must be structured. Most have simply used notes and given a speech, but everyone has really done a great job.

This is the way that I feel college level learning should be. It should be about the experience of learning. Too often, a class will be about memorizing information, and taking tests. However, the classes we will remember will be the ones where we work outside the box, and do something different. Hopefully, the majority of my classes will be like this one.

 

Death by Hyperbole

As I began to look for an article for my Week #5 text response blog, I stumbled across an article entitled “Powerpoint: Killer App?” It was written by Ruth Marcus, who, according to our text, writes for The Washington Post editorial board. I, literally, read it with my mouth wide open. She makes the contention that Powerpoint software is so boring and mundane that people using and listening to it have become lazy and unaware of what they are hearing. She actually uses the terms soul-sapping and torture to make a connection to the ineffectiveness of Powerpoint (Argument! 274-275). Have you ever heard of the phrase “Don’t shoot the messenger?” This is a case of shooting the messenger’s software.

If a person is so bored during a business meeting or an academic presentation that they miss the message, then maybe the speaker needs to reconsider their approach. Lecturers have struggled with how to engage the audience for ages. I can assure you that people have missed important information for years because of monotone voices and ineffective visuals. Couldn’t you make the same argument a few years ago with dry-erase markers and white boards? What about all the teachers in the 1980’s who seemed to have an overhead projector attached to their hip?

I agree that Powerpoint could make a presenter less than exciting, but it could also be harnessed by a creative-type personality. It has the capability to be used to create visuals and disseminate information in a way that can engage an audience. It is the responsibility of the person giving the instruction to make it informative and intriguing. Don’t lay the blame at the feet of the visual aid, that criticism should be directed at the penny loafers of a tedious and lackadaisical speaker.  

Powerball changes

As I write this week’s blog entry, the Powerball jackpot for Wednesday night is $284 million dollars. It may even climb higher than that considering how many tickets will be sold in the last few hours. That is an incredible amount of money that would change anyone’s life, and hopefully it will be split among a few different winning ticket holders. But maybe not, it could be simply one ticket holder that receives all of that money.

The Powerball rules currently state that someone match 5 numbers from a pool of numbers from 1 to 59, and also match one Powerball from a separate pool of numbers from 1 to 35. This is obviously very rare, and the current odds to match all 5 plus the Powerball are 1 in 175 million. The reason the jackpot is so large is because no one has achieved this in the last 13 drawings.

So, my opinion is: why not change the rules a little when the jackpot gets that big? A jackpot over $200 million is an incredible sum of money for only one person. It doesn’t have to turn someone into a mogul, and a lower jackpot can still set a person up for many years to come. After all, this is money that you won from luck. It’s not exactly as though you earned it.

My proposal is to drop the Powerball requirement from the first drawing that reaches $250 million dollars. Any and all players who match 5 numbers in the next drawing would split the jackpot. For example, in Saturday’s $250 million drawing, 10 players matched 5 numbers, but failed to match the Powerball. That means under my proposal, those 10 people would have split $250 million, and receive $25 million apiece. That is certainly a large amount of money for anyone, and it could benefit at least 10 potential families.

I understand that lottery officials may resist this type of change because they receive considerable publicity from the large jackpots, but 10 or more millionaires could generate quite the buzz as well. Saturday’s winners were from California, New York, New Jersey, Colorado, West Virginia, Oklahoma, Florida, and Texas. That could generate substantial goodwill in all the areas where the winners reside. I just feel that in these economic times it would show great compassion to sacrifice the huge jackpot to have more people benefit from the money.

Not thin? Okay, you're fat!

This blog post is written in response to the article “Social Lubricant: How a Marketing Campaign Became the Catalyst for a Societal Debate” by Rob Walker. It focuses on some advertisements by Dove that feature the Dove Girls, who are women of all shapes and sizes photographed in their underwear. It has created chatter in the media, and all because they are using average and curvy women.

Mr. Walker does an admirable job attempting to explain Dove’s motivation for the campaign, and why it is a refreshing sight. He refrains from calling it a publicity stunt. He and I agree that most Americans have grown tired of seeing nothing but too skinny models gracing the covers of fashion magazines, while we check-out at the local grocery store.

My problem with his assessment is the use of the word “fat”. Now, I wasn’t born yesterday, and I know that the use of the fat joke is, and probably always will be acceptable in American society. However, in a story about a company using normal, everyday women in their ads, I find its use to be a bit classless. Even the first word of the story is fat.  I know that he only uses it twice, but I feel that the whole article could have been written without it. At one point, he even mentions that maybe their next move should “to show up in a Burger King ad, enjoying an Enormous Omelet Sandwich.”  Maybe, it could be my own personal struggles with weight loss that makes me so sensitive to the subject. But this could be a story about the beauty in the common woman, but instead, he turns it into an article about “fat” girls.

Now we know what his opinion of a normal woman is

The Better, Big Bang Theory

In the world of American TV sitcoms, the introduction of new main characters usually indicates that the show is attempting to spice up a tired ensemble. In some cases, such as adding Cousin Oliver to The Brady Bunch, it shows that the beginning of the end is near. However, in the case of The Big Bang Theory, the addition of Bernadette and Amy has improved on an already working formula. Can these highly intelligent, social misfits find happiness and love?

These girls aren’t only love interests for the guys, but they also add a depth to the entire social dynamic. Now, Penny is not simply the girl next door, but she now has friends to hang out with and they have adventures of their own. There is now a female dynamic that contrasts with the previously male dominated show.

Bernadette, played by Melissa Rauch, has brought out the heart and softer side of Howard Wolowitz. In prior seasons, his character had shown a strong libido, but hadn’t shown a true respect for women, with the exception of his Mother. Now, the recently married Howard has shown a romantic and vulnerable nature, although he is stumbling through being a married man and cohabitating with another woman. Bernadette has shown that even though she is diminutive, she will not take any grief from anyone.

Amy, played my Mayim Bialik, on the other hand, has learned that Sheldon Cooper is not your average man. In contrast to Howard, he is not controlled by his libido. He is the quintessential brainiac, but he has shown that his feelings for Amy are not always cerebral. She has brought out a completely different side of him, which shows his depth and growth as a character. His mind may be all physics, but his heart shows signs of his Texas upbringing.

These ladies have provided this show with a chemistry that can last for many seasons to come. This trio of women can provide this show with many storylines in the years to come. Everything, from girl power to possible relationship challenges, is possible from this talented group.

But don’t just take my opinion, the audience has also agreed. The current season 7 is experiencing some of it’s best ratings. A recent episode on January 9, 2014, had 25.3 million viewers, the most in the show’s history. (tvbythenumbers.com) It shows that the current cast, including Bernadette and Amy, will deliver large numbers of viewers, as long as the characters provide laughs and compelling storylines.

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2014/01/27/the-big-bang-theory-delivers-its-largest-live-plus-7-day-audience-ever/232358/