The planet is trying to shake us off like a bad case of fleas.

I had no clue that my sole purpose in life was make plastic for our planet. Thankyou George Carlin, now I know that. All sarcasm aside Carlin did raise some pretty good points. Especially when he compared how long humans have been on the planet to how long the planet has actually been in existence. and meteors and ice ages and shit. Our planet has gone through some way more traumatic stuff than an overdose on carbon dioxide. He's also right. We are so worried about taking care of the "bees and trees and whales and snales" they we havent even realized that we can barely take care of ourselves. Im too lazy at the moment to look up the daily world death rate but Im pretty sure that its high. And I am also pretty sure that about half of those deaths are semi-preventable. The rest are either accidents our the negative effect of nature (whther it be viral, chemical, atmospheric etc) on the human body. In a nutshell, Nature is kicking or fat assess and we still have the nerve to call ourselves boss. I dont thiink we need to focus on eevery tree and bird and snail when our own extinction is approaching much more rapidly. However, we should fight to save pandas because theyre really cute and i like them.

Another Focused Freewrite (btw, if its focused is it really free?...just throwing that out there)

When I think of just add water I think of Ray's pet turtle. (actually is that even a PET turtle or is just a turtle that likes to camp out in Ray's front yard because he's the only non-crazy person on the street?) The turtle is thrivingin that arid, lifeless environment. In fact, it seems to be pretty much the only thing that is doing okay. Why is that? Did the turtle just adapt to its environment? Did it like 5,000,000 years ago? Nvm I need to get back to my point before I end up doing what I usually do and ranting about something totally unrelated.
So here's my point. Trona sucks, the weather the heat the environment suck. However, Ray and his turtle both stand out as signs of life.

iI'll trade you my Euplotes for your chocolate chip cookie

This is the first article in the entire collection of The Best American Science and Nature Writing where I could actually feel the author's passion for his subject, understand his message, and be able to explain it someone else. In other words, I actually really enjoyed this piece. Sure I didn't understand the names and descriptions of all of the microorganisms that ___ writes about, but I was able to really grasp his main message. Nature is beautiful. Its simplicity, its variety, the understated complexity of its internal structures, its constant yet low-mainentance availability are what make it so beautiful. Just when you think you've hit the bottom of the pond, you have seen and studied all that is out there, you dig a little bit through the sand and discover a new animalcule.
To some individuals, the fact that Smith feels that he has "trouble explaining my [his] satisfaction with the animalcules" might seem strange. After all, at the end of the day theyre all animals, theyre just really really small animals. What satisfaction is there to have? How could there possibly be any trouble in finding the apropriate explanation? I might be wrong in the attempt I am about to make in answering this question, but I think that this is how it works. I'll use an example. My mom buys a big tub of tollhouse chocolate chip cookie dough. She bakes a few cookies. I eat one or two and am satisfied because I have seen the big tub I know that there are plenty more and even when that tub runs out there is some supermarket somewhere that will have another one. I know what to expect because it is a delicious chocolate chip cookie, but each batch is never the same so I also am able to contendtedly anticipate what this exact batch will be like.
Smith says that, " for some reason i often feel calm and reassured afterward perhaps because I realize how much room there remains for more." He then goes on to talk about his paparazzi-like fascination with the lives and purposes of the animalcules. "Just one cell, this Euplotes, and barely one-tenth of a millimeter in length, but it scurries with purpose and aplomb in this world."

Smith loves Animalcules and I love chocolate chip cookies (and David Beckham although i love him for very differnt reasons) and I think that the reasons why we are fascinated with both subjects are relatively similar.

this......sucked

In an effort to be a better student I have been actually doing my homework lately. That means that I did indeed read Benjamin Phelan's How We Evolve. This is one assignment I probably would have been better off skipping. I realize that I may not get points for this blog post but at the same time I'll never get back the 45 min of life I wasted reading this article so if I want to pointlessly rant then I am going to pointlessly rant.
First of all, what the heck is going in the first eightpages? I seriously did NOT get that. And angst? What angst? I didn't sense the tiniest bit of angst when he said "The fate of our civlization and maybe our species may be determined by the next five generations. So I don't really give a shit what's happening to our genetic evolution". I did however get a pretty good sense of anger from the guy at the top of the page. I can actually see how this guy's "angst" is justified. Basically his point is that humans might be gone pretty soon so he doesnt give a duck if 2,000 years from now humans have evolved to have like idk 13 toes instead of 10.
As far as angst in the line about self-inflicted extinction goes...im just not seeing it.


actually you know what i take back what i said previously about getting no points for this. I am legit asking for comments if someone will explain this p.o.s. to me then I willl happily rewrite my blog, until them im going to dutch treats i am badly in need of some zero calorie vitamin water.

Now I know why my dad chose not to invest apple...

Forgive me if I sound like an airhead,
but what the heck is Broome talking about. I mean I get what he's talking about but what the heck is he actually talking about. Personally I think that this piece totally could have been kept out of the book I dont think the guy ever really reached an actual conclusion.(then again i might be wrong, my steady intake of benadryl over the past few days maybe affecting my ability to comprehend things...but i dont think thats the case)

The question proposed to us was what does Broome claim the money market reveals about people's ethical judgements about the value of future well-being. Okay so. Basically I found this one sentence that I think pretty much sums up the answer to that question. Broome asserts that," the evidence shows that, when people borrow and lend, they often give less weight to their own future well-being than to their present well-being." Bingo. There it is.
I guess that statement can be tied to that whole concept of discount rate in the article. People judge their current lifestyle and the goods they have the most access to NOW as being worth more than ones that they will receive down the road. Furthermore, if they are not even going to be the recipients of these future goods or benefits. The less value you place on future stuff the higher your discount rate will be and the less motivated you will be to make sacrifices now. Like investing in stocks in the money market. My dad could have invested in Apple like idk twenty years ago (I really wish he did) but he didn't really see that much future gain, instead it was just like ummm I don't want to buy a shit ton of stocks in that company now because I wont be getting an income from it any time soon.
does that make sense?
if it doesn't...well sorry i dont know what to tell you and i probably wont feel like explaining.

Blogging is......

Okay so i will be honest. I am NOT a blogger. Well techincallly I am because this whole blogging thing is a huge part of this class, but this is somethign that I would probably never do in my free time. The funny thing though, is that i definitely like to read other people'es blogs. Not just for this class (well acctually i dont really enjoy reading the ones for this class at all just because there are about Twelfth Night and Big foot and stuff). But i follow this blog linked to the mayo clinic on healthcare and another one about veganism and a couple other ones like dailycandy and style.com's blogs. Like I have said before I am a reader not a writer and when Im really pasionate about what I am reading then I will read it nonstop.
Writing..mmm. not so much a huge writing fan, blogging especially.

Write-a-phobia

When I first watched Derrida’s video I honestly thought he was being a little umm…over dramatic. Then I took down my to cool for this dumb youtube video mindset and realized a lot of what he was saying is write. He says that he feels that what he has written is important to share with the world. It is easy for us to say “well of course YOU think what YOU say is important” to someone. But them how often do we have something to say that we feel is important. I think that writing something down further emphasizes the importance of a message because now you are making it available to more people and making it available to be reproduced and redistributed, essentially you are making it so that you can reach more people. And Derrida is right. When I have to share something I have written I really can relate to the Freudian analogy of being seen in your underwear. I had one of my blogs read out loud in class and was cringing the whole time. On the surface, in phase 1, writing gives you freedom. Like Derrida, you can be as controversial as you want because its just you, your pen and your paper. Once it is spread and read aloud though all your walls and protection are gone and you are left up to the judgement of others. To top it off not only are you exposed but you often times are not present to defend yourself when others read your work. Maybe I am being over dramatic like Derrida, but I think the fear of writing really could be a legit phobia.