Prior to the storm that started last night, the air was actually warm in the valley. I noted this as the warehouseman at Sears came out to gather from my car the range hood I had errantly ordered.
He gathered his heavy coat to get it out of my car. I told him he might be surpriaed to see that the weather was pretty warm. When he got outside he said that he thought that the temperatures were warmer outside than in the warehouse.
I ordered a 36 inch hood for a 30 inch space. The sears clerk said that I could get a replacement on the 9th.. no credit my account. It was beauty. I drove over to Lowe's and picked their top on the line Allure 2 off the shelf and saved $300. I had spent it earlier when I bought the top of the line insinerator for 288. It was not included in the bid. The dishwasher an e dishwasher along the lines of the e windows arrived. It is stainless steel with the controls on the top of the draws. The refrig arrived too. Its a dozy.. as Cammie would say.. in a good way. It has a pur water filter built into it with ice and side by side. It has the the racks I like in the freezer and the refidgerator. Its stainless too, Energy Star compliant.. pretty cool.
We also have a new microwave/ convection on the counter oven. We thought that Sue could get to it easier if it were on the counter instead of on the wall.
The only thing missing is the stove. It is a Maytag stove and is on its way by truck from the mid west (I hope). Its supposed to be here on the 9th. It features a small pizza like oven under the countertop. Then a big convection oven under that. Everything is gas.
The kitchen counters are all in. the tile looks great. The same is true with the laundry tile on its top. The sinks are in and hold water. Louie the working was grumbling about how hard it was to get the spring loaded connectors to hold the sinks in place. He did and they are great. They are neptune stainless sinks the best quality.
Louie said that on one of their previous jobs the owner had bought the sinks before they came. They were too thin. Every time they ran their garbage disposal the plumbing shook and made loud noises. He was glad to see that I had a decent sink going in with a 7 year garbage disposal.
Yesterday I also helped the contractor but the master bed back in place. We had to find the pieces of it from all over the house. Sue wanted it lowered so we found that the bed had tiny pedestals on the base of each post. We unscrewed those. We also had to lower the supports that are under the king bed to the floor. These had to be cut down with a sawsall. I am hoping that they will be just the right size.
They are all pushing to get it done for the final inspection. The main thing the inspector is going to do is check to see if the plugs are all working. He is going to check to see that the fire alarms are all coordinated.
Its looking pretty exciting.
Lindsay, Sean and Heather are scheduled to come help this weekend. I am not sure that they will be able to with the storm.
Hope you can stay warm and safe out of the weather today.
Love Pat
Friday, January 4, 2008
Thursday, January 3, 2008
Your Facts vs Beliefs
I found this interesting article on the web. It was published by the Christian Science Monitor. I always wondered how cultural beliefs and the science which are on opposite sides could co-exist in intellectual minds. This article supports the idea that with many there is a separation of the two and they do not interact..
By Thomas W. Martin Thu Jan 3, 3:00 AM ET
Tempe, Ariz. - Twenty years ago, as a college freshman, I knew precisely what it meant to be scientifically literate. In fact, I held an objective measure in the palm of my hand, courtesy of E.D. Hirsch. His book, "Cultural Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know," was a bestselling paperback, and conveniently listed thousands of names, terms, and phrases with which every educated person – he informed us – should be familiar.
After plodding through the entire list during the course of an afternoon, I smugly discovered I could easily define each item of scientific vocabulary. Fuzziness about literary examples such as "Aeschylus" caused me no discomfort, but inability to rigorously describe "aerobic respiration" in the biochemical sense (not the superficial, then-popular Jane Fonda sense) would have induced severe nerdish embarrassment.
The wrong kind of scientific literacy
Today I teach science and its history at an honors college and am naturally far less confident about how to measure scientific literacy. The students who enter our program possess not only the expected high SAT scores, but also perfect or near-perfect scores on a battery of Advanced Placement exams, particularly in the basic sciences.
A noticeable portion of those students also believe in the literal truth of certain ancient accounts of Earth's history that, to put it bluntly, directly contradict mountains of well-established data from geology, climatology, and biology. Without rehashing the ongoing culture wars surrounding this topic (and certainly without berating my own students), this serves as a useful place to begin tackling the notion of "scientific literacy."
We frequently hear the refrain that if America simply raised the level of science courses, taught our children more subjects, and/or gave them more hands-on lab work, it could ensure the production of a citizenry capable of understanding an increasingly complex world. They would then be prepared to make the difficult choices of the 21st century.
However, my incoming students' technical mastery already exceeds what even the most rosy-eyed optimist could realistically dream for America (or the globe) as a whole. In other words, even if a citizenry were to achieve an impressive degree of scientific literacy – construed as raw conceptual competence – it would still be entirely possible for those same citizens to routinely subordinate scientific evidence to their own deeply ingrained cultural suppositions.
Evidence blindness
More important, the phenomenon of "evidence blindness" is hardly restricted to inexperienced students, or even to ideological segments of the general population. To varying degrees, it can be found across the spectrum, including some very striking examples in the realm of professional science itself.
As noted last year in Seed magazine, leading disciplinary practitioners who feel threatened by unorthodox new findings will sometimes band together to suppress such information, with the explicit intention of blocking its appearance in scientific journals.
While these luminaries undoubtedly convince themselves they are merely upholding the integrity of their fields, the truth is that they (in quintessentially human fashion) are often more interested in preserving cherished beliefs than in encouraging potentially disruptive discoveries.
Over the past few decades, growing evidence from cognitive science has revealed significant limits on the ability of individuals to criticize their own viewpoints. Even the most analytically gifted and experienced among us are susceptible to bias and self-deception to an extent that we (fittingly enough) generally fail to appreciate.
As psychologist Daniel Gilbert puts it in his book "Stumbling on Happiness," "Each of us is trapped in a place, a time, and a circumstance, and our attempts to use our minds to transcend those boundaries are, more often than not, ineffective."
The reason science does manage to be astonishingly effective is not because large groups are automatically wiser or less prone to self-deception than individuals. History adequately demonstrates that, if anything, the opposite is more nearly the case.
Science works because its core dynamics – not its methods or techniques per se – are rooted in pitting intellects against one another. Science eventually yields impressive answers because it compels smart people to incessantly try to disprove the ideas generated by other smart people.
The goal of science is to find those ideas that can withstand the long and hard barrage of evidence-based argument. That lesson must be experienced anew by the members of each generation, irrespective of their careers.
Mastery of scientific concepts and theories is a necessary starting point, but it serves only as a prerequisite to joining the never-ending dialogue. Students must learn firsthand how to both imaginatively create new hypotheses and dispassionately critique them.
Many commentators have rightly implored us to make certain that young people encounter the "thrill" of discovery. While this is undeniably desirable, it is arguably even more crucial that they experience the agony (if only on a modest scale) of having a pet hypothesis demolished by facts.
Several current presidential candidates have insisted that they oppose the modern scientific account of Earth's natural history as a matter of principle. In the present cultural climate, altering one's beliefs in response to anything (facts included) is considered a sign of weakness.
Students must be convinced that changing one's mind in light of the evidence is not weakness: Changing one's mind is the essence of intellectual growth.
By encouraging students into evidence-based debates with one another, this mode of interaction, like any other, can become habitual. After being consistently challenged by their peers, most students eventually see that attempts to free themselves from facts are a hollow, and fundamentally precarious, form of "freedom."
Value in criticizing ideas
In an era in which we tremble at offending the sensibilities of our neighbors, students must comprehend that it is not only possible but absolutely vital that we criticize one another's ideas about reality firmly yet civilly. They must do this despite clear cases of prominent scientists falling into petty, acerbic (and therefore counterproductive) exchanges.
The responsibility for fostering scientific literacy of this sort – that is, literacy construed as an ongoing commitment to evidence over preconception – falls upon all of us in our discussions both formal and informal, both public and private. When scientific celebrities fail to set a good example for students, it is especially incumbent upon the rest of us to set them back on the proverbial right track, rather than to reflexively hasten their derailment.
We do our children no favors by going easy on them – or, more to the point – allowing them to go easy on each other. Nature has a way of being far tougher.
If we can create environments in which they can safely have small epiphanies in the light of evidence, they will be motivated to share those lessons. They will then be scientifically literate in the sense that scientific discourse will continue to endure and flourish. And that is the sense that ultimately matters.
• Thomas W. Martin is an honors faculty fellow at Barrett Honors College at Arizona State University in Tempe. This was the winning essay of the Second Annual Seed Science Writing Contest, published in Seed, Issue 12, September/October 2007. Included here by permission
By Thomas W. Martin Thu Jan 3, 3:00 AM ET
Tempe, Ariz. - Twenty years ago, as a college freshman, I knew precisely what it meant to be scientifically literate. In fact, I held an objective measure in the palm of my hand, courtesy of E.D. Hirsch. His book, "Cultural Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know," was a bestselling paperback, and conveniently listed thousands of names, terms, and phrases with which every educated person – he informed us – should be familiar.
After plodding through the entire list during the course of an afternoon, I smugly discovered I could easily define each item of scientific vocabulary. Fuzziness about literary examples such as "Aeschylus" caused me no discomfort, but inability to rigorously describe "aerobic respiration" in the biochemical sense (not the superficial, then-popular Jane Fonda sense) would have induced severe nerdish embarrassment.
The wrong kind of scientific literacy
Today I teach science and its history at an honors college and am naturally far less confident about how to measure scientific literacy. The students who enter our program possess not only the expected high SAT scores, but also perfect or near-perfect scores on a battery of Advanced Placement exams, particularly in the basic sciences.
A noticeable portion of those students also believe in the literal truth of certain ancient accounts of Earth's history that, to put it bluntly, directly contradict mountains of well-established data from geology, climatology, and biology. Without rehashing the ongoing culture wars surrounding this topic (and certainly without berating my own students), this serves as a useful place to begin tackling the notion of "scientific literacy."
We frequently hear the refrain that if America simply raised the level of science courses, taught our children more subjects, and/or gave them more hands-on lab work, it could ensure the production of a citizenry capable of understanding an increasingly complex world. They would then be prepared to make the difficult choices of the 21st century.
However, my incoming students' technical mastery already exceeds what even the most rosy-eyed optimist could realistically dream for America (or the globe) as a whole. In other words, even if a citizenry were to achieve an impressive degree of scientific literacy – construed as raw conceptual competence – it would still be entirely possible for those same citizens to routinely subordinate scientific evidence to their own deeply ingrained cultural suppositions.
Evidence blindness
More important, the phenomenon of "evidence blindness" is hardly restricted to inexperienced students, or even to ideological segments of the general population. To varying degrees, it can be found across the spectrum, including some very striking examples in the realm of professional science itself.
As noted last year in Seed magazine, leading disciplinary practitioners who feel threatened by unorthodox new findings will sometimes band together to suppress such information, with the explicit intention of blocking its appearance in scientific journals.
While these luminaries undoubtedly convince themselves they are merely upholding the integrity of their fields, the truth is that they (in quintessentially human fashion) are often more interested in preserving cherished beliefs than in encouraging potentially disruptive discoveries.
Over the past few decades, growing evidence from cognitive science has revealed significant limits on the ability of individuals to criticize their own viewpoints. Even the most analytically gifted and experienced among us are susceptible to bias and self-deception to an extent that we (fittingly enough) generally fail to appreciate.
As psychologist Daniel Gilbert puts it in his book "Stumbling on Happiness," "Each of us is trapped in a place, a time, and a circumstance, and our attempts to use our minds to transcend those boundaries are, more often than not, ineffective."
The reason science does manage to be astonishingly effective is not because large groups are automatically wiser or less prone to self-deception than individuals. History adequately demonstrates that, if anything, the opposite is more nearly the case.
Science works because its core dynamics – not its methods or techniques per se – are rooted in pitting intellects against one another. Science eventually yields impressive answers because it compels smart people to incessantly try to disprove the ideas generated by other smart people.
The goal of science is to find those ideas that can withstand the long and hard barrage of evidence-based argument. That lesson must be experienced anew by the members of each generation, irrespective of their careers.
Mastery of scientific concepts and theories is a necessary starting point, but it serves only as a prerequisite to joining the never-ending dialogue. Students must learn firsthand how to both imaginatively create new hypotheses and dispassionately critique them.
Many commentators have rightly implored us to make certain that young people encounter the "thrill" of discovery. While this is undeniably desirable, it is arguably even more crucial that they experience the agony (if only on a modest scale) of having a pet hypothesis demolished by facts.
Several current presidential candidates have insisted that they oppose the modern scientific account of Earth's natural history as a matter of principle. In the present cultural climate, altering one's beliefs in response to anything (facts included) is considered a sign of weakness.
Students must be convinced that changing one's mind in light of the evidence is not weakness: Changing one's mind is the essence of intellectual growth.
By encouraging students into evidence-based debates with one another, this mode of interaction, like any other, can become habitual. After being consistently challenged by their peers, most students eventually see that attempts to free themselves from facts are a hollow, and fundamentally precarious, form of "freedom."
Value in criticizing ideas
In an era in which we tremble at offending the sensibilities of our neighbors, students must comprehend that it is not only possible but absolutely vital that we criticize one another's ideas about reality firmly yet civilly. They must do this despite clear cases of prominent scientists falling into petty, acerbic (and therefore counterproductive) exchanges.
The responsibility for fostering scientific literacy of this sort – that is, literacy construed as an ongoing commitment to evidence over preconception – falls upon all of us in our discussions both formal and informal, both public and private. When scientific celebrities fail to set a good example for students, it is especially incumbent upon the rest of us to set them back on the proverbial right track, rather than to reflexively hasten their derailment.
We do our children no favors by going easy on them – or, more to the point – allowing them to go easy on each other. Nature has a way of being far tougher.
If we can create environments in which they can safely have small epiphanies in the light of evidence, they will be motivated to share those lessons. They will then be scientifically literate in the sense that scientific discourse will continue to endure and flourish. And that is the sense that ultimately matters.
• Thomas W. Martin is an honors faculty fellow at Barrett Honors College at Arizona State University in Tempe. This was the winning essay of the Second Annual Seed Science Writing Contest, published in Seed, Issue 12, September/October 2007. Included here by permission
A Life without a Car
Could you live without your car? How far are are you away from your essential services? My commute every day is less than 5 miles. Could I walk there to work? We live 2 blocks from our grocery store. I frequently walk over to get grocery items. Balancing the load is always an issue. You must be careful to make sure that your eyes are not bigger than your arms. In essence you do not choose to purchase more than you can carry home. All purchases must be double wrapped because you are walking. If we could do this, how much oil would we save? I think that some of this concept is what draws Linzi to the field of urban planning.
Both of my daughters live without the benefit of an automobile. Costco is problematic. When Linzi needs a car for travel to see us she hops on the train, or rents a car. Heather lives in San Francisco where owning a car is an expensive luxury. The cost of parking is prohibitive. She uses buses and Bart and street cars to get to work.
I love the information that PGnE is putting out about CFL (compact Florescent Lights) and their savings put in terms of how many cars they saving in te3rms of energy use. The visualization of economic terms makes it easier to understand the importance of doing one thing over another. Never under estimate the value you of a visual concept prop. A raise equals how many cheeseburgers? Have a great day.
: ) pat
Both of my daughters live without the benefit of an automobile. Costco is problematic. When Linzi needs a car for travel to see us she hops on the train, or rents a car. Heather lives in San Francisco where owning a car is an expensive luxury. The cost of parking is prohibitive. She uses buses and Bart and street cars to get to work.
I love the information that PGnE is putting out about CFL (compact Florescent Lights) and their savings put in terms of how many cars they saving in te3rms of energy use. The visualization of economic terms makes it easier to understand the importance of doing one thing over another. Never under estimate the value you of a visual concept prop. A raise equals how many cheeseburgers? Have a great day.
: ) pat
Wednesday, January 2, 2008
A Funny One on Me
This morning I was at Lowes to purchase a garbage disposal for the remodel. I completed my purchase and headed out the door. Not thinking I strode up the the grey escape and hit the door unlock from my key chain remote. Nothing happened. I thought, darn, this thing is broken. No I probably hit the remote from the Expedition. They are very similar. So I pulled out the other remote and hit it frantically. Still nothing happened. Then I thought the darn battery is dead in the remote. So I got closer and hit it again at the passenger side. Still no success. Finally I looked into the car window. It was not my car. it had a little chihuahua bobble head on the front dash. I looked back at the front of Lowes with a panic look on my face. Two elderly ladies were rolling in laughter at my antics. I gestured with my keys in my hands and hit my head gently with them. I saw my Escapte in the parking line just ahead, out of the handicapped parking area.
One time up at a parking lot Linzi and I got into a areostar that looked just like ours. I jumped in and so did she. It was unlocked. Somehow the key just didn't work. Also it wasn't my tissue box on the drink cup island. We got out of that puppy in a hurry.
: ) Pat
One time up at a parking lot Linzi and I got into a areostar that looked just like ours. I jumped in and so did she. It was unlocked. Somehow the key just didn't work. Also it wasn't my tissue box on the drink cup island. We got out of that puppy in a hurry.
: ) Pat
Happy Birthday Linzi
Today is Linzi's birthday. So you lurkers that have her number.. give her a call!
This morning after my walk, I pruned the peaches of my neighbor that lives at the end of the cul de sac. He has a little flat peach with a real almond flavor. I think that it is a Saturn peach. Its origin is China. He also had a peach on the other side of the apricot trees. I gave it a good pruning too. Its the best way to improve the quality and overall quantity of peach tree. The owner before him planted the peaches and apricots in a semi public space. Sometimes the kids come by and throw the immature fruit at each other. The little flat peaches he enjoyed on his breakfast cereal each morning. It just took a few moments of my time. Both the trees are small enough so that I did not have to haul down a ladder.. cool. It is sure nice to have a corona lopper and a pruning shears. For the big stuff I get out my cordless sawsall. The cordless sawsall has a pruning blade. With a big battery (I think 24 volt) it will cut until you are tired of holding it against the tree. If you use it on the smaller branches it will shake you to death.
Bought a new garbage disposal. Our last one was an "insinkerator" brand.. it was great and lasted 4 years and was still going strong. It left with the demolition. The sears ones are good (in my experience) about 2 years. They cost almost as much. This one is the top of the line.. guaranteed for 7 years in house replacement.
I had time to do the extended loop this morning.
Love
Pat
This morning after my walk, I pruned the peaches of my neighbor that lives at the end of the cul de sac. He has a little flat peach with a real almond flavor. I think that it is a Saturn peach. Its origin is China. He also had a peach on the other side of the apricot trees. I gave it a good pruning too. Its the best way to improve the quality and overall quantity of peach tree. The owner before him planted the peaches and apricots in a semi public space. Sometimes the kids come by and throw the immature fruit at each other. The little flat peaches he enjoyed on his breakfast cereal each morning. It just took a few moments of my time. Both the trees are small enough so that I did not have to haul down a ladder.. cool. It is sure nice to have a corona lopper and a pruning shears. For the big stuff I get out my cordless sawsall. The cordless sawsall has a pruning blade. With a big battery (I think 24 volt) it will cut until you are tired of holding it against the tree. If you use it on the smaller branches it will shake you to death.
Bought a new garbage disposal. Our last one was an "insinkerator" brand.. it was great and lasted 4 years and was still going strong. It left with the demolition. The sears ones are good (in my experience) about 2 years. They cost almost as much. This one is the top of the line.. guaranteed for 7 years in house replacement.
I had time to do the extended loop this morning.
Love
Pat
Soo Foggy Last Night
Sue and I went off to the Mexican restaurant in Winton, just north of here last night. There was a little ground fog going at 6:15. We made it a night out, and saw Enchanted. On the way home it got really foggy. You know its foggy when you can see the the cone of your lights as you drive.
Enchanted was a great movie that all my princess loving daughters would love. I enjoyed it too growing up around princess loving sisters. Sue was a little squeamish around the rodents that came to help her clean up the house. It s a great little fantasy story and the colors just pop off the screen. Sara Sarandon plays the wicked mother in law to be. She is very convincing. There are so very cool technological leaps in the art of film making. It was a great outing.. but we were glad we were not trying to travel log distances in the fog.
My dashboard tell me that the weather in Gunnison is -26 this morning. brrrrrrrr.
: ) Pat
Enchanted was a great movie that all my princess loving daughters would love. I enjoyed it too growing up around princess loving sisters. Sue was a little squeamish around the rodents that came to help her clean up the house. It s a great little fantasy story and the colors just pop off the screen. Sara Sarandon plays the wicked mother in law to be. She is very convincing. There are so very cool technological leaps in the art of film making. It was a great outing.. but we were glad we were not trying to travel log distances in the fog.
My dashboard tell me that the weather in Gunnison is -26 this morning. brrrrrrrr.
: ) Pat
Tuesday, January 1, 2008
Happy New Year!
Sue and I are not much as far as party animals. We watched the home improvement shows until 12:30 last night and then went to bed. All around us people were shooting off firecrackers and sky rockets by the college.
One of the most memorable New Years was one year in the middle 60's. Grandma and Grandpa were out from Colorado. Dad decided to spring for a color T.V. It was called a Portocolor. GE produced the first portable color TV around. It weighed about 25 pounds and had a 5 inch screen.
We were all excited because it would show the Rose Bowl parade in "living color." This was Grandma Nelly's favorite thing in world. She had an quarter of an acre of roses in front of her house, she knew each one by name and their peculiarites. So the family Christmas gift was born. This wonderful TV cost 350 dollars in that era.. That was a fortune.
So a couple of days before the big event, dad got it out and plugged it in. It was DOA (Dead on Arrival). So we made a mad dash to the store (a furniture store) and explained the whole circumstance. It was covered under warranty. They gave us another in exchange. In the mean time they sent that one out to be fixed. It returned fixed and for a brief period of time we had two.. imagine that. Two TV's were at one time there was none. I grew up not watching TV because it took away the drive for me to learn to read.. Thank goodness my parents did this for me. At 14- 15 they realized that I would be a reader and TV was not going to be an issue.
Have a great day.. Have a great year..
Love Pat
One of the most memorable New Years was one year in the middle 60's. Grandma and Grandpa were out from Colorado. Dad decided to spring for a color T.V. It was called a Portocolor. GE produced the first portable color TV around. It weighed about 25 pounds and had a 5 inch screen.
We were all excited because it would show the Rose Bowl parade in "living color." This was Grandma Nelly's favorite thing in world. She had an quarter of an acre of roses in front of her house, she knew each one by name and their peculiarites. So the family Christmas gift was born. This wonderful TV cost 350 dollars in that era.. That was a fortune.
So a couple of days before the big event, dad got it out and plugged it in. It was DOA (Dead on Arrival). So we made a mad dash to the store (a furniture store) and explained the whole circumstance. It was covered under warranty. They gave us another in exchange. In the mean time they sent that one out to be fixed. It returned fixed and for a brief period of time we had two.. imagine that. Two TV's were at one time there was none. I grew up not watching TV because it took away the drive for me to learn to read.. Thank goodness my parents did this for me. At 14- 15 they realized that I would be a reader and TV was not going to be an issue.
Have a great day.. Have a great year..
Love Pat
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)