Well, I am in the middle of finals and exam proficiencies so I haven't had anytime to really do anything but study and be up at clinic.

Anyways, I came across a "Story for Young Materialist's" over at the Evangelical Outpost, written by Joe Carter. It's great. It basically strips a pure naturalist's view on the origin of the universe and man of all of it's scientific jargon and presents it as a kid's story. Not only is it funny, but it shows how irrational that view really is. If anything, an atheist, after reading it, should at least admit that their belief's regarding the origin of the universe are just that - BELIEFS.

In honor of it actually snowing here in my new home state of Oklahoma, here are a couple Calvin & Hobbes comics dealing with fun in the snow. They also do a good job of pretty much summing up all that crap that some call "modern art." I appreciate good art, I'm not ignorant about it, and every once in a while I'll see something "modern" and be impressed by it. However, most of the time it looks to me like someone trying too hard to be so different that they don't even know what they're trying to be or what they end up making. It's sort of a "make-it-up-as-you-go-and-interpret-it-later" approach.

In these comics we have Calvin, the modern artist, using large and complex, yet very vague, words to describe what he is trying to convey, in hopes of fooling the uneducated observer. Hobbes plays the role of the general public, acting like he's impressed, when really he doesn't know what the heck he is looking at or why he should be impressed. His only real observation is that it's all the same color. Everything else seems to slip past him unnoticed.

Consider me "the philistine on the sidewalk" in the second comic.

As I was studying the other day with some of my classmates, I had a startling revelation....you can tell alot about someone by whether they use a pencil or a pen when doing their work, and, that you can basically group the world's population into 2 groups based on this. So here's what I'm going to do to prove it to you: I'm going to tell you what your personality is based on this trait alone. (Let me know if I'm right) If you prefer pencil, be ready to be revealed for the indecisive wimp that you are. If you use pen, as I do, you'll see why us ink-lover's rule the world. (This test is in no way biased towards my love of the ink. It's just the truth.)

Pencil User: You are a nice person. You do things when people tell you to. However, you are a little indecisive, withdrawn, and unconfident. Indecisive because you are always changing your answers or rechecking your math, erasing and re-writing as you go. Withdrawn, because you don't want anyone to see the mistakes that you've made. You hide them by not pressing hard when you write and erasing your mistakes so that others don't see. Unconfident, for many of the same reasons. You are not sure what to write or if you'll get the answer right the first time. By using your pencil, you go into a problem with an attitude of "I'm gonna fail and have to do this over again and I don't want anyone to see that I failed so I'll erase it again and again until I eventually get it right." You never know when you're going to break (lead breaks) and be exposed as useless. You never know when you're no longer going to be able to hide the mistakes you've made (run out of eraser) and be shown as a fraud. Visually, you look something like this: , , , or

Pen User: You, oh wise one, are brimming with confidence; a real go-getter. You know that you are going to get it right, and get it right the first time. You have no reason to be able to erase the mistakes, as you don't make them. On the rare occasion that you do make a mistake, you own up to it for all the world to see and just scribble it out on your way to making that higher grade, getting that better promotion, and taking home that prettier girl. Those who use pencil work for you. Visually, you look something like this: , , or

So, there you have it. I got you pegged for exactly the type of person you are, didn't I? For all you pencil-users out there, why don't you take the next step to becoming the new you and start using pen. It's the best choice you'll ever make.

It's been thought that the method through which cancer spreads is by malignant cells breaking off the tumor and traveling to other sites, where new tumors then develop (metastasis). In this article a new discovery shows that cancerous tumors communicate with our own bone marrow, which then responds by actually preparing a new site for the secondary tumor to develop. Amazing. The researchers hope to be able to find ways to stop this communication from happening, thus preventing the spread of cancer throughout a patient's body.

What's more amazing...the fact that the cancer is able to use our own bone marrow to help it spread, or, the fact that we're able to actually figure that out? It's a toss-up.

Well, alot has happened since I last posted on the whole "KU/ID is mythology" class to be taught by a professor Paul Mirecki. To begin with, the class got canceled when even more of Mirecki's emails leaked out. You can read about it here. The emails themselves are available somewhere...they include such morsels as comparing the eucharist at his Catholic Church to vomitting in his mouth and more along those lines. Classy.

I also wanted to point out that one of my alma mater's, Kansas State University, is also teaching a class that deals with ID, as you can read about here. While ID is still not given much credit, it does seem that the class will be handled properly and with respect, which is about all you can ask for at this point. I don't think ID should be taught as science, but it DOES need to be discussed fairly at this point in time, and it appears this class is a step in the right direction.

Now this is where things get strange. It's being reported that the aforementioned Professor Mirecki has been beaten up, literally. He was driving to breakfast this morning when he stopped and got out of his car to confront 2 men who were following him. They then proceeded to beat him up.

Now, let me first say that if this story is true, than it is a sad commentary and gives an even more negative view of my fellow Kansans. Violence should not be resorted to over an issue like this ever. However, since I am rather insignificant myself and anyone with any significance wouldn't be able to say this, I am rather suspicious () of how convenient this whole situation is for Mr. Mirecki. He goes from being the goat to being a victim and at the same time makes his view look like the superior and correct one by casting those who oppose him in an extremely negative light. He has no alibies, as it was on a deserted road early in the morning. He suffered bruising, but that was about it. To me, it's all a little too fishy and sounds like he is pulling a political PR stunt to save face. But maybe I am wrong. Let's hope so. I do, though, want to recommend to Mr. Dembski and Mr. Behe and others that they should quickly arrange a similar situation for themselves, where they get roughed up a bit, but come out looking like a victim and completely embarrasing the other side.

UPDATE: Prof. Mirecki's story is now starting to gain a more wide based criticism, as everyone who hears it seems to be a little bit skeptical. Here is a blog entry that gets into the details regarding all of the discrepencies.