Wind Energy

I've always found this annoying and kind of funny in a way. As a society in general, people want more environmentally friendly methods of power generation, such as wind turbines and solar panels. But then the instant the government listens and decides to install wind turbines, everyone in that community is suddenly against it and the town is full of "stop the windmills" signs. They're all for renewable energy, as long as it's nowhere near them. Corporations are just as bad. They really don't care one way or the other, as long as it makes them look good. I've seen wind turbines put on the side of department stores that never spin. The company could have put it high on the their roof or in some field where it might actually do some good, but then no one would see the "effort" the company is putting in to preserve the environment.

The thing I don't get is that the companies are worried that they will not be recognized for their good deed. Yet somehow environmental and animal advocacy groups get information not on display for the public, thus they should also see these deeds. I've been handed brochures before accusing a clothing manufacturer of genital electrocution on animals. I'm pretty sure they didn't have an animal tied to the side of their store being electrocuted, so obviously the things they do are being watched. So if they were to pay for wind turbines to be set up in an ideal location, the lobbyists would see that they aren't the anti-environment corporation they thought they were. We want renewable energy such as wind, but don't want to have turbines in our backyards. So we say large corporations should take the initiative because they have money to spend. So they construct useless turbines in the public eye to increase positive opinion and nothing changes.

The other reason I found this funny was because I saw several towns showing protest against these turbines during the worst of the job recession.  They obviously didn't realize the number of jobs this would be creating to have the turbines transported, built and maintained.

Half Acronyms

Are we slowly de-evolving? We must have reached our peak stage with our Ninety Eighty-Four-esque language with short forms and acronyms for everything. But recently I've notice more and more the use of half acronyms, which I henceforth dub hacronyms. Two examples I hear most often are, FY information and ASA possible. Language was functioning at maximum efficiency with common phrases reduced to as little as three letters. So why now is language reverting to these less efficient hacronyms?

The use of hacronyms can actually be quite funny when used properly in sitcoms, but use is real life in unjustified. And it's even worse when people can't grasp the concept of a hacronym and say the acronym and part of the phrase. I've seen the use of "FAQ questions," "FYI information," "for your FYI" and many others. In attempting to use an acronym they actually lengthened what they were trying to say and looked really dumb in the process.  For your for your information, seriously? This is like accidentally writing the word "the" twice or when people following physically laughing out loud by saying "LOL."

I've decided that if this is going to be permitted by society, I will regress language even further by using half English and half Latin phrases. No longer shall I use "et cetera." I must now use "and cetera," until society can no longer tolerate the de-evolution of language and once again returns it to its maximum efficiency. If you want to help me here are some other words you can use:

    Example gratia
    Quod erat demonstrated
    Ad infinity
    Good fide (or) Bona faith

There's plenty more to use, but unless you're a lawyer, you're probably not tossing them around too often.

I wonder how this got started and who is responsible?  Maybe it is a brain-washing advertising campaign by TGI Fridays?

Noah's Ark

Much like everyone else in the world right now, I've been following the tragedy in Japan. In thinking about everything with the tsunami, earthquake and the resulting disaster even with the protection measures they had. Seeing this, I really can't understand how some people still say that stories in the Bible are just that, stories. With the size of buildings today, there is still a lot of damage. Imagine Old Testament times where buildings were not as structurally sound and much shorter, thus easily destroyed with the same amount of flooding. No preventative measures against earthquakes and no barriers against tidal waves. The tragedy in Japan is still ongoing after several days, even with all the clean up efforts and support from around the globe. So it's not hard to believe an unrestricted tsunami could last 40 days and 40 nights before it spreads thin or is absorbed into the Earth. But why is the story of Noah's Ark so hard to believe? Maybe it's the animals coming to the ark, but it is quite common for animal to sense danger and react to avoid it. So animals coming out from their caves, nests, burrows et cetera to seek safety and get gathered up by Noah and his family. Not much else is out of the ordinary in Ark story and anything that is, is likely due to the story being transferred verbally before finally being recorded. Ever played broken telephone? It's like that. I really don't see what is difficult to accept about the events with Noah's Ark actually happening.

Epic Music

Is it just me or has playing music got a lot less epic with the latest developments in music formats. Now, if you want to show a friend some sweet song, you open your iTunes library (or whatever software you use) and double click the song and it plays. Or if your friend is elsewhere, you email it to them or link them to YouTube. Either way it is even lamer when you have a slow computer or media player. You tell your bud all about this wicked song, queue it up and then wait this long awkward pause until it finally plays. Probably the coolest modern way to share music is passing your friend one earbud and playing it on your iPod, and I'm still unimpressed.  

Rewind a few decades back to cassette tapes. Imagine popping in a cassette and all the clicks you hear as you close the tape deck. Wait for the cue tone (that slowly increasing pitch) and then your song plays. Pretty rad, but let's go back further to the LP. You pull out your new record sleeve (likely from a milk crate), slide out the vinyl and twirl it in between your fingers. Then you place it onto the turntable and listen to the beautiful crackling static as you drop the needle. With this epic a listening experience and the lack of one with the current medium, it's no wonder records have been coming back in style. Which sounds better to you? "Left click twice in rapid succession," or "drop the needle."

The Office

Most people know that season 7 (the current season) will be Michael Scott's last season since Steve Carell's contract will be expiring. And if you didn't, now you know.  The good news is that NBC plans to continue the show, which you may also have known.  The big question is who will be replacing Michael?  Will it be Jim or Dwight?  Or Pam?  Or Kelly!??  Jim has been the co-manager in the past, Pam has started a management type role, and Kelly took the Sabre executive training. But, I think it will go to none of these characters.  At the beginning of "The Seminar" episode, Michael ran into David Brent, the manager of Wernham Hogg in the original series.  They really hit it off and when Michael said he worked for Dunder Mifflin, David said, "Any jobs going?" Michael even agreed to let if know if any do.  David Brent has experience managing a paper company and even uses the that's what she said jokes.  He is the perfect candidate for the job.  Plus, Ricky Gervais is brillant.  Oh, and he is an executive producer on the show. Six seasons and he doesn't appear until the 140th episode, which just happens to be 7 episodes before the first part of the "Goodbye, Michael" episodes.  I really think there is a possibility Gervais could be replacing Carell, and I must say I am excited about this possibility.  You should be too!

vCards

Worst name ever.  I would love to meet the business masterminds and titans of industry who decided to name contact information vCards. For those who don't know, a vCard stores details such as phone numbers, name, email, etc. and is transferred through urls, tags, and QR codes. I am also quite certain vCard is a commonly known name for virginity. Imagine how odd mentions of vCards in everyday discussions will be, especially in business.  Great example, you are at a bar and introduce yourself to the man next to you.  He says, "Sorry, I'm only here to score as many vCards as possible."  Guys talking about taking a girl's vCard at a bar may not seem entirely weird, but imagine a business situation.  Say that after a client meeting the client leaves forgetting to leave his contact info and you hear your boss yell to him, "wait, I need your vCard."  If math and science have taught me anything, it is to not give two things the same name.  Come up with something original.  It may seem hard at first, but heeds much better results.  There had to be an alternative to vCard.  I guess this will only end with a sexual harassment lawsuit, because if The Office has taught me anything, it's that the Michael Scott bosses of the world will only take advantage of this.  "Sorry Dwight, I can't give you my vCard.  I lost it to Jan years ago." (And yes, nerd, I know Michael wasn't a virgin with Jan)