You'd like some nice, light reading that tries to make sense out of what is clearly a "we win, you lose" scenario? Go to this thing. The CTA chair's blog. Which is actually very nice for the instant gratification crowd that can't wait to rip into someone connected with the CTA for having some decidedly boneheaded policies (like "If the train is running late, sometimes it'll just start skipping stops, so that the people waiting for the late train are forced to wait even longer"), but the most recent post (concerning food) is entertaining, if only because she dances around the whole apparent hypocracy of getting millions from rent that vendors pay to be in the CTA station, and then fining people who actually eat that food once they're on the train. I understand the concern of having to spend an exorbitant amount to clean, but it still seems contradictory to sell food, then bust people for eating. She rationalizes the policy ("It's not that bad. In DC, you'd be shot.") but I can't help but feel that it's inadequate.
I'm never using Wikipedia again. Two nights ago, I'm kicking around, clicking on whatever link happens to catch my eye and end up reading a bit about Don Adams (of Get Smart fame). Which is fine and nice. Until he dies the next day. Shame, that. I actually liked Get Smart...ten years ago when it actually was aired on Nick At Nite, before being removed for such "classic TV" as The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air.
Not that I'm knocking the Fresh Prince. It's just not classic, is all, if new episodes were still being produced when I was in eighth grade, if I'm only just out of college now.
That's nine years. Nine years does not classic television make.
The Bucs dropped another one to the Dodgers, making Kip Wells the first pitcher to lose 18 games since Jose DeLeon in '85, but what're you going to do. I didn't watch the game or listen to it on the radio, but from the report on the Pirates website, that's probably a good thing. They just weren't playing baseball. That's all.
In local-ish news, White Sox Fans were disappointed when the Sox couldn't pull it together to take the series opener from the fourth-place Tigers, and one day after everyone in the state was printing out "World Series Championship" t-shirts, the excitement has notably diminished. Unfortunately, in an attempt to get my sleep schedule back in order, I didn't watch the game after the sixth, and so can't comment if Ozzie ate anyone.
The Dover trial continues, with several advocates calling Intelligent design "a 21-st century form of creationism". Yes, students should be able to access information regarding the differences of opinion in the scientific realm, but as a scientific topic, intelligent design falls flat on its face. It does not invoke the scientific method, it is not falsifiable, it is not testable. It is in no way a valid scientific "theory", in the way science works. Could it be correct? Sure. But it's still not science, and shouldn't be held up as such. While we're here, yes. Theism is imbedded in intelligent design. ID supporters claim that it is not necessarily God that is responsible for design. The counter to this is, of course, "Who designed the designer?", at which point you either have to have a more intelligent non-deity designer, or claim that the designer was a deity, and that its origins cannot be understood.
Which is an example of why it's not science.
Children should learn about intelligent design and religion, but they shouldn't be doing so in a course in which the fundamental underlying principle is "follow the scientific method".
There now. Have fun with that.