The Faith of an Atheist

I’ve been reading a great deal about atheism and the growing number of atheists in America. It’s really hard to pinpoint how many there are out of the estimated 305 million Americans, but around 20 million atheists seems to be the current agreement among different polling agencies. Although there are many different types of atheists, the most well-known is the Materialist who believes that physical matter is the only reality. Atheists rely heavily on scientific evidence to support their position, which is that there is no physical evidence that God exists. One of the most respectable modern atheists, Christopher Hitchens, asserts that “the concept of God or a supreme being is a totalitarian belief that destroys individual freedom, and that free expression and scientific discovery should replace religion as a means of teaching ethics and defining human civilization.”

Christopher Hitchens

I took a great deal of time to read different atheist blogs, visit atheist websites, and read about other atheists leading their message of free thinking like Christopher Hitchens, Peter Atkins or Richard Dawkins. Each intellectual, whether famous or not, has an in-depth argument as to why God does not exist. The only way I could truly begin to understand their argument was to immerse myself in the science that they feel best supports their logic, beginning with the Big Bang Theory.

"Matter cannot spring from nothingness."

When reading about the Big Bang Theory, there is no reasonable explanation for how the primeval atom, as Georges Lemaître named it, came to be. Although the theory does not state in finite terms that one, single atom was present before the massive explosion (Although earlier versions of the Big Bang Theory suggest it), it does state that dense matter existed. What is impossible to scientifically explain is how the matter got there. What is improbable is that the matter that initiated the Big Bang came from nothing. Matter cannot spring from nothingness.

During the initial stages of the Big Bang, the universe went through a short period of aggressive expansion that was required for life to be possible anywhere in the universe. This process in the early stages of the universe’s expansion is called  Nucleosynthesis. Nucleosynthesis is the process of creating new atomic nuclei from pre-existing nucleons (protons and neutrons). Without Nucleosynthesis, the universe would have been made up entirely of hydrogen. Additionally, it was Nucleosynthesis that helped bring the universe to a size specific enough to have life. Any smaller in the early stages and life would not exist on Earth. What makes Nucleosynthesis interesting in discussions about the Big Bang theory is if the process would have lasted longer than 3 minutes the entire expansion would have collapsed. What also makes Nucleosynthesis interesting in the Big Bang discussion is the doubt within the scientific community that it did only last 3 minutes. In other words, it should have lasted longer considering the chaos that was taking place.

“If our Solar System were located any closer to the center of the Galaxy, we would not exist.”

Let’s fast forward from Big Bang to our Solar System. Our Solar System has been in a stable rotation for nearly 5 billion years, and our Solar System is located somewhere between the outer arms of our Milky Way Galaxy. If our Solar System were located any closer to the center of the Galaxy, we would not exist. Furthermore, without Jupiter in our Solar System, we would be the constant victim of space debris. If it weren’t for our precise axis (Which is 23.5 degrees) the Earth’s Summers would be far too hot and the Winters far too cold to harbor life. Imagine a 15 mile thick sheet of ice on top of where you’re sitting right now or a sweltering 300 degree Summer.

What can be concluded in just these few theories? That there are specific requirements for life to have began and be maintained on Earth. There are not just a few loose requirements through scientific discovery, but many strict, specific requirements that require a reader several days to look over. Without these distinct preconditions, I would not be writing this blog because I would not exist. It’s been identified concerning the Big Bang that it was improbable for something to be created from nothing, that the speed of the initial expansion was necessary for life to spring from the universe, and without the specific timeframe of 3 minutes  of Nucleosynthesis the universe would have been made up entirely of hydrogen. Furthermore, our position in the Milky Way, in the Solar System, and the tilt of the Earth’s  axis are highly critical in maintaining life on Earth. Any minor variance would cause our planet to be a lot like Venus, which has an atmosphere of carbon dioxide and nitrogen, and a surface that exceeds 800 degrees Fahrenheit.

When you question the scientific field concerning the numerous proposals lacking scientific

"I haven't even touched the surface of biology simply because the subject is equally vast."

explanation, their response is this: It was random chance and a set of perfect conditions. I only chose a few theories and situations, beginning with the Big Bang, that have been given the random chance/perfect conditions statement . I haven’t even touched the surface of biology simply because the subject is equally vast (Like the quandary of the human eye, the assertion of molecules coalescing into cells) and has equally numerous, shoulder-shrugging remarks. Random chance and perfect conditions have become the mantra of the scientific field for many unexplained theories beginning with the Big Bang up to man walking upright and building fires. When you look up the word theory in the dictionary, you will find this:

–noun, plural -ries.

1. A coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena: Einstein’s theory of relativity. A proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact.

“If a theory is sound and accurately explains the phenomenon under question, a scientist is challenged to find factual support for it.”

A theory, as stated above, is not a fact. If a theory is sound and accurately explains the phenomenon under question, a scientist is challenged to find factual support for it. However, finding factual support for a theory is not the same thing as proving a theory. By the way, if a theory were true, it wouldn’t be a theory anymore,  it would be a fact. Therefore, the question must be asked: If scientifically you cannot prove a specific theory, and the theory is still in question, and there are large gaps in explanation of a theory, then what motivates an atheist to believe there is no God based on that theory? The answer is undoubtedly, unarguably, undeniably, unquestionably simple. An atheist has faith. If faith is to have confidence and trust in a person or thing, then a Materialist atheist has faith that the scientific community, and scientists, are correct in their assumptions that point to a naturalistic cause for life, as well as the universe’s existence even when there’s strong suspicion as to the final conjecture.

The question I would ask is this: If an atheist has faith in something that isn’t scientifically

"If an atheist has faith in something that isn't scientifically proven, why would they insist on discrediting religious people who also have faith in something that isn't scientifically proven?"

 proven, why would they insist on discrediting religious people who also have faith in something that isn’t scientifically proven? It is reasonable and fair to disagree with believers, but in my dealings with atheists I haven’t seen the rational, calculated responsibility of the scientific community in the way they respond. I have seen harsh, absurd, nonsensical statements made from all kinds of atheist circles. I have also seen much of the atheist movement dismiss any and all arguments from believers, Christian Apologetics, and people of many religious backgrounds. No matter the clash between atheist and believer, the atheist finds it acceptable to take an imperious position as opposed to offering an intellectual rebuttal. There is nothing scientific about an atheist’s approach to the God question. Instead of admitting they don’t know, but believe that there is not God, they make harsh judgments against believers and suggest a malformation of the mind that has caused 2.1 billion people to believe in a Creator.

“If atheism were allowed to rule the world, what would this world look like under their rule?”

As I wrap up Part 1 of my 2 Part blog on atheism, I am already challenging anyone who reads this to consider the following questions before my next post: If atheism were allowed to rule the world, what would this world look like under their rule? Additionally, what does atheism have to offer?  These are valid questions that must be asked of a group who place their faith in science. If “scientific discovery should replace religion as a means of teaching ethics and defining human civilization”, then what would our world look like if religious morals were discarded and replaced with the scientific values of an atheist? What is a scientific ethic? These are the questions I ponder when dissecting the mind of an atheist, who without a doubt is as faithful to a human being’s evaluation of theoretical uncertainty as believers are in an Omnipotent Being they have never seen.

Blogging For Quality, Not Quantity: A Guide To Better Posts

Writing can be a formidable opponent. There are times when an author feels as if he’s battling to position his words in the most inspirational way. Each word raises a sword in an effort to draw the blood of another and take a stronger position in a sentence or paragraph. The word that wins will influence the next word, which will influence the next word, and the next and so on.

By proper positioning of one’s words the tone remains under control. Get the combination wrong and you lose your reader. For example: Whenever I read something that is highly opinionated and filled with scornful remarks my mind tends to drift and I lose interest. It feels as if I’m being yelled at by the author! Remember what it felt like to get lectured by a parent? After a while you stopped listening to the words and all you heard was the tone, which usually was indignation on the parents part for your poor behavior. The continuous attempt for the parent to drive home their point caused your mind to get lost in the weeds of better times and better decisions you’ve made. Writing can take on the same essence. Although, with a reader they can move on to another blog, another webpage, or just click the red “X” in the upper right of the browser and be done with it.

“Whenever I read something that is highly opinionated and filled with scornful remarks my mind tends to drift and I lose interest.”

"Whenever your parent decided to reserve their harsh tone and righteous anger and instead fostered discussion or dialogue with you, I imagine a better response from you."

It is imperative to keep your reader throughout your piece. If you can keep your reader until the end there is a fair chance they may return for the next essay, article, or blog. Taking into account the lecturing parent again: Whenever your parent decided to reserve their harsh tone and righteous anger and instead fostered discussion or dialogue with you, I imagine a better response from you. More than likely, you not only took what they said under consideration, but if there was a difference of opinion you at least felt respected by your parent for creating open dialogue with you. Again, writing can take on the same essence. If I write something that isn’t too heavy or too light, that makes my opinion obvious but without anger or malice, that maintains a discussion as opposed to dictating or soap-box ranting, I will keep my reader’s attention. Also, I may have a chance to get them back the next time I post.

I’ve written pieces for this blogging site that took on tones that were either too harsh or too cynical. I’ve read many blogs on WordPress.com that lean one way or another. They were either written with a long venomous rant or they were written to discredit or disparage others when forming a discussion or debate may have served them better. I don’t disagree that some people need disparaging due to their irreparable behavior, but to stick with that theme or tone alone consistently in an author’s blog can weigh a readers desire to return. Eventually, we all get sick of the lecturing, yelling, angry parent. We get it. The issue being bellowed in type is important. However, maintaining a discussion with your reader, challenging them to see your perspective, and opening up debate will keep your readers interested. I can’t stress that enough.

My father stated many times before, “Your first paragraph will not be your best. It’s when you rethink and edit your original written word your paragraph gains its genius.”

Once you have dedicated yourself to blogging in a way that generates discussion as opposed to one-way conversation, it’s time to work on the quality of your posts. Unlike quantity, quality will leave an impression on your reader. My father stated many times before, “Your first paragraph will not be your best. It’s when you rethink and edit your original written word your paragraph gains its genius.” The key word in my father’s  advice is “edit”. Unlike tone, I will not go on about editing, save to write this: Devote at least three readings with plans to make changes.  The first time through edit your wording and spelling(There, their, and they’re for example). The second time through edit the positioning of your sentences (You may find that a lead-in sentence is better served in the middle and so on). The third time through get a sense of your tone and flow and make necessary adjustments according to how it makes you feel. This can be tough to do since most people have a hard time reading their own work from their audiences perspective. This third time through can also be dedicated to economizing your language: Say more with less. Wordiness can be a problem. Have enough self awareness to know when your tone is a turn-off and you are too wordy.

“With as many bloggers who write a few paragraphs, don’t take time to add pictures, and don’t edit their writing, it can be beneficial for you to add some spark to your page and show additional effort.”

Personally, I think pictures throughout a post, video if you can find it and it supports your message, and other supportive content can help positively separate your blog from other blogs. I personally like the “Block Quote” insert. You can take a single quote from your own writing and place it in the body of your blog (Preferably in the gaps between paragraphs). With as many bloggers who write a few paragraphs, don’t take time to add pictures, and don’t edit their writing, it can be beneficial for you to add some spark to your page and show additional effort.

Utilizing some of the methodology I’ve described can be helpful to increasing your foot traffic. Granted, writing consistently can also help. As I’ve hinted above, consistency is good, but blogging for the sake of blogging can

"To look deep inside yourself for important, insightful stories every day with elements of proper tone, well-written, content filled posts is challenging."

be harmful to future progress. If you don’t have something to say that is meaningful (Even if it’s only meaningful to you), well written, and has supportive content, then avoiding the trap of the daily blogger might be approach. I’ve tried the “Post A Day 2011″ challenge. I feel it’s extremely beneficial in motivating bloggers who don’t have a determined, practiced approach to writing. It helps form the discipline needed to write. In order to call yourself a writer, you must write. Writer’s write because they must. They have something important to say, insight they feel is persuasive, or a story that is both personal and special. To look deep inside yourself for important, insightful stories every day with elements of proper tone, well-written, content filled posts is challenging.  Personally, I think the “Post A Week 2011″ challenge is more fitting for someone striving for quality work. I am switching to that just so I can focus more on my message and content as opposed to frequency for the sake of frequency.

I have found some tidbits online that also help in deciding the importance of when to post your blog. According to lorelle.wordpress.com, here are some of the best times to post based on their testing for the last several years (link provided below–1):

• The highest traffic in a month comes in the first and third weeks of a month, with more hits during the end half of a month.
• The highest traffic days of the week are Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, and Saturday.
• The highest traffic in an average day comes during 0800 – 1400 PST (1600 – 2200 GMT).
• Most comments are posted between 0900 – 1400 PST (1600 – 2200 GMT).
• People are more likely to comment on a post on Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday.

I have personally used these timeframes with my blog and they do work in some respects. It isn’t dramatic by any means, but it has gained more foot traffic for me on some of those specific days and times. However, if you read the post on lorelle.wordpress.com, you will find updated information for 2010, which is the most current information due to their testing and has some changes.

A daily blog may not be a good blog. Your readers can become accustomed to uninteresting babble like, “I ate today. It was good.”

On blogsessive.com, they have some good tips and pointers on “Writing Reader Engaging Posts”. It covers some of the same information I have, but it covers other ideas I did not. I recommend giving it a thorough reading. Here is an excerpt (link provided below–2):

• Community growth – Obviously, writing quality posts has the power to turn casual visitors into loyal readers, as long as you maintain a good flow;
• Social media exposure – The more interesting and better written the post, the more people will want to share and recommend it across services like Reddit, Digg, StumbleUpon, Mixx and so on;
• Conversations – A good post is more likely to entice readers to engage in commenting. This is a great way to further develop the topic or even generate new content ideas;
• Networking - Engaging posts are great ways to network with other bloggers in your niche. Write something appealing and you’ll surely make their link-round-ups;
• Quality traffic – Of course, all of the above are great ways to generate either a great deal of traffic or quality traffic.

"It is important to know your tone and have a clear message."

In conclusion, it is important to know your tone and have a clear message. You can write without having a theme as long as you have creative content that is engaging

"You can reach an audience that will truly be interested in reading your material."

 with each post. Make sure you check your blog carefully for errors in spelling and structure. Add supportive information, pictures, videos, or links that can help demonstrate your engagement of the subject matter. Don’t get caught in the trap of blogging for the sake of blogging. A daily blog may not be a good blog. Your readers can become accustomed to uninteresting babble like, “I ate today. It was good.” Find out when the best time is for you to post. Finally, be prepared to do a lot of reading. Not only should you familiarize yourself with current topics on best practices for blogging, but you should also be prepared to network with other bloggers in order to create cross traffic.

By following all of these steps, you can reach an audience that will truly be interested in reading your material. For a writer, a willing audience stacks high on the list of personal desire. Best of luck to you in your personal essay journey.

Additional Resources and Annotations:

http://bit.ly/s5TKo (lorelle.wordpress.com–1)

http://bit.ly/bcwsw (blogsessive.com–2)

http://bit.ly/euVK7v (problogger.net)

http://bit.ly/hKemBW (WordPress.com “Blogging Tips” Search)

http://bit.ly/7zwglv (Wikipedia on “Blog”)

I wrote a blog several months ago about our daughter and the infamous “family bed”. I write “infamous” because it’s controversial to have your baby sleep in your bed with you, apparently (insert eye roll here). We had her sleep with us originally because she rolled over at a very early age. Once she did roll over, she had a tendency to sleep directly on her face. Of course, our fear was SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome). Now that our daughter is 7 months old our fears have been subsided for some time, but getting her to sleep in her crib has been an incredible challenge.

We read about the Ferber Method, which has received a bad impression over the years as the “let your baby cry themselves to sleep” method. In further reading, that is not the actual method. However, we have slowly tried a night routine of bath time, play time, story time, and then into her crib and leave the room. When she cries, we come back and check on her without picking her up. At about the 3-4th time of checking on her she has usually reached a heightened state of panic and crying and we’re resolved to picking her up. From the time we put her down to when we finally get her out of her crib is usually about 10 minutes.

My wife breast feeds. The last feeding of the night we’ve tried putting her in her bed right afterwards due to the fact she usually falls asleep during her last feeding. I’ve warmed up a towel in the dryer and placed it in her crib to get the mattress warm. We’ve placed her in her crib asleep (I remove the towel beforehand), but after a half an hour she’s usually awake and freaked out.

Basically, we haven’t tried these techniques long, but thus far they don’t seem to be working. Is there any suggestions out there?

I want to thank my wife for an incredible wine and cheese party today. She invited family and my best friends. We had a great time drinking, eating, and playing Xbox Kinect. Thank you for being an incredible woman.

If I had a time machine what would I do? Where, actually when, would I go? That’s a great question. I’ve heard many people asked this question before. Want to know the common answer I’ve heard? It’s usually, “I would kill Hitler.” What? Kill Hitler? Yes, that’s the common answer. I never quite understood that. Why would someone go back and kill Hitler? I’m not questioning the intention or desire of wanting to rid the world of a mass murderer and psychopath. No, no, no…I truly understand wanting to do that. Yet, you know what separates us from Hitler? The fact that we can’t kill, including the mass murdering psychopath.

Killing someone isn’t easy. I’m not speaking from experience or desire. Listen to a war veteran who has taken a life. They’ll tell you: I didn’t want to kill. So, scratch that from my list. I am way under qualified for that. I’ve also heard this one before in response to If I Had A Time Machine…Can you guess what I heard? If you’re thinking money you’re getting warmer. I’ve heard “I would buy Microsoft stock at the very beginning.” Yeah, I wouldn’t mind doing that too, but in getting rich wouldn’t you worry about who you’d become? You know what I’m talking about. Don’t sit there at your computer, reading this blog, shaking your head as if to say, “C’mon idiot. I’d be me! I would still be me!”

Right. Keep telling yourself that. Do you know why we remember people like Mark Zuckerberg, Bill Gates, and Oprah Winfrey? It isn’t because they came up with ideas and became rich and built big houses. Seriously. There’s a lot of people who have done that. Many of them you don’t know at all. The reason why we remember those people is because of how much money they made, and how much money they gave away. A lot! Don’t argue. They did. They have. They continue too. So, if you decided to go back in time, buy a bunch of Microsoft stock, would you be prepared to become something entirely different? Would you give some of that back or just hoard it? Don’t kid yourself. People do weird things when they get money. It’s rare they do the right thing.

Back to the question: What would I do if I had a time machine? Well, not the two things I mentioned above. I wouldn’t kill Hitler. I wouldn’t buy Microsoft stock. I guess the question I’d ask is this: Can I go back more than once, to different times, and return home? Just say yes. There’s a lot I’d do. To start: I wouldn’t go back before January 11th, 1973. I want to be sure I don’t affect anything to do with my birth. I like being alive. This is a tough question to answer when you put thought into it! However, I think I know what I would do.

I would first go back to when I was four years old, living on a ranch in Northern Washington State. I would watch myself watching the sun set. I remember being in awe of it. I want to see if my memory serves me correct. I would jump about a year later and see if that horse really did buck me off. My uncle says it did, but I still wonder if my uncle pushed me off of the horse. Long story. I would go forward in time from there to when I was ten years old marching into the woods with my father. I was carrying a rifle and preparing to learn to shoot. I remember I was scared and angry all at once. Ten was a tough age for me. There was a lot going on that year. There was a lot going on in my mind that day. I would want to see the look on my face. To this day my father tells me I get the same scrunched up, frowning glare.

I would go to fourteen from their. That was my first real kiss. Yes, I had kissed a girl before that, but nothing like at fourteen. I would then go to seventeen. I punched a bully in the nose. It was the perfect punch. He bled everywhere and my best friend at that time was spared a horrible beating. Two weeks later I got the crap beat out of me by a member of the basketball team I played on. Those two incidents deserve  a second viewing. The victory and then the defeat.

I would flash forward about 3 months later as I hugged the first girl I ever loved goodbye. She was a beautiful Norwegian blonde. It wasn’t the fact she was beautiful that attracted me to her, but what I knew about her. She was an incredible person. We never kissed. We never had any physical intimate moments. We were friends. We hugged at times. We spoke to each other a lot. When she left and went back to Norway it was the first time I felt physical pain due to emotional loss in my life. Years later we have both become friends on Facebook. She’s still an incredible person and a great mother.

There are many other times I would want to go back and observe myself. I guess that’s the point. I wouldn’t want to do anything else, but observe my own life. There isn’t anything I would want to change in this world. I’m not writing that because I wouldn’t want to stop evil or become rich. Those are things that anyone would want to do. I’m writing that because if I was meant to do those things it would have happened. Besides, isn’t it important to live for now and try to pave a road for a better future?

That’s what I think, if anyone cares.

I watched President Obama’s speech to the survivors of the shooting in Tucson, Arizona today when I got home from work. I was able to find it on YouTube. One thing struck me when the speech ended: He didn’t have to spend any time defending his words to anyone. That is a stark contrast to other “politicians” who are spending a great deal of time not providing words of encouragement or remorse, but instead having to defend their poor choices in the past. I wrote a blog a few days ago calling for political powers and media to “Shut up”. Today, I embrace what I’ve heard from President Obama.

As a father of four, with three girls (One who is seven months old) and one boy, I can not only weep over the pain that Christina’s parents feel, but I can see in Obama’s face the hurt in knowing a sweet, precious, lovely young lady has lost her life so tragically at the hands of evil. Every parent lives with the fear of losing a child. No parent wants them to go first. We all pray to go first. Today, I pray for Christina’s parents who have suffered a tragedy I cannot fathom. God bless you.

Obama’s speech below:

I love movie rumors as well as previews of what to expect. Today there were two photos released from films in the works. One of the photos was of Andrew Garfield from The Social Network as the new Peter Parker in the Spiderman reboot. The other photo was of Chris Evans as Captain America. I really don’t have an opinion yet, but check these out for yourself. What’s your opinion? Is it too early to do another Spiderman franchise? Do the costumes on these two guys look stupid? Check it out!

Andrew Garfield as Spiderman:

Chris Evans as Captain America:

I’m a Verizon man. I was once an AT&T man. Then one day AT&T gave me the worst customer service I’ve ever dealt with in my life. Not long after that AT&T was bought out by Cingular. The customer service got worse, so I left Cingular. Somewhere along the way Cingular became AT&T again. I don’t know what happened there, but I switched to Verizon. I’ve been extremely happy at Verizon. They know customer service. They know their products. Then Apple released the iPhone to AT&T. I was tempted to switch back, but something told me that it wouldn’t be a good experience. Granted, I might have the iPhone, but I’d be with poor coverage and poor customer service. For me, that was not a fair trade-off. Well, I’m sure everyone’s heard by now: Verizon is getting an iPhone. Even though I’m excited to hear that (Mostly because my best friend in the world works for Verizon) I’m torn on getting the iPhone. Granted, it is appealing, but I have my reasons right now why I won’t get one. I have a Droid X and I love it, but an iPhone…Well, I might be uber-awesome if I got one, right?

I’ve come up with The Top 10 Reasons Why You Won’t Buy A Verizon iPhone either. Am I close to any reasons you won’t do it? Read my list below:

# 10: Because you’ve convinced yourself that Android devices are better and that you’ll rebel against being assimilated with the iLife population even though your buddy and his kids, plus your wife/husband, plus your dad who is cell phone retarded, and your cat all have iPhones.

# 9: Because Steve Jobs doesn’t allow software designers/programmers to do whatever they want when they write an App for the iPhone and completely f#&! Apple security which has a reputation to be only second to BlackBerry when it comes to protecting their consumers/users but somehow you keep telling yourself it’s kind of cute that the Android devices are like fresh open wounds to an easily catchable disease because it’s noble to be flawed and available to viruses.

#8: Because that one time someone hacked into iPhone security…That…One…Time…

#7: Because you won’t buy anything that continues to use a clean, silvery, glossy looking, sleek design and doesn’t take a risk and release a pink or purple version that you decide one day to upgrade too and now you’re stuck with your new pink phone with purple trim for at least two years until you can upgrade and when you finally can you decide to just get a flip phone without a camera or data charges because who needs internet and all the bells and whistles until one day your wife sends you a picture of your kid being cute and because of the lack of data on your service that pic of your kid shows up on your bill costing $32.

#6: Because you tell yourself you’ll never use the Netflix App even though you have Netflix on your Xbox 360 and last week you uploaded the Tom Hanks movie The Money Pit but it took two hours to transfer the movie over to your smart phone because your phone didn’t have the latest plugin/encoding to accept the upload to your phone but wait now you’re getting emails from Comcast because you illegally downloaded that movie and you might get fined millions of dollars like that Harvard kid but now you’re pissed because now The Money Pit is on instant play on Netflix but you don’t have a phone with the Netflix App because iPhone is the only one who has it.

#5:Because if you remove the letter “i” from the front of iPhone it’s just called Phone and you think that’s stupid.

#4: Because you don’t want to get an iPad to help you find your iPhone if you lose it because the iPad has a tracking system that can help you lock out your iPhone and you think it’s going to work in reverse and someday the person who stole your phone will reverse the tracking system and find you by tracing your iPad and then they’ll rob you of your Droid X so now you’re only going to get an old Nokia analog phone even though they don’t work but by doing so you’re telling “the man” that you won’t be tracked by no damn phone/pad combination and that will cause the company to go bankrupt.

#3: Because your ex-girlfriend got one from her new boyfriend and now she’s a bitch even though she was a bitch before because she cheated on you with her “new” boyfriend and when you confronted him about it he just punched you in the mouth and while you were on the ground crying he said to you, “The last time you kissed her on the mouth how’d I taste?”

#2: Because you saw a movie with Shia Labeouf and he had an iPhone and you think he looks like your ex-girlfriend’s new boyfriend.

And, the number 1 reason why you won’t get a new Verizon iPhone.

#1: It won’t say “Drooooooooooooooooooooooid” every time you get an email!!!!!!

You know what? I might just get a Verizon iPhone…And you probably will too.

I know this is lame, but this is my blog today: I’m now 38. Happy birthday to me. This will be my blog as part of the “Blog a Day Challenge.”

God bless. Take care.

It’s hard to find the exact words to express the kind of weekend this was. When my wife and I first saw the news break concerning the shooting in Arizona we went from disbelief to shock to anger and finally profound sadness. On Sunday my wife saw a snippet of an interview with the father of 9 year old Christina Taylor Green who was murdered during the attempted assassination of Gabrielle Giffords. As Christina’s father described his daughter and her life (She was born on 9/11), my wife and I quietly wept. Painful. So incredibly painful.

The thing that has always amazed me about Americans is when we rally around each other during great tragedy. I saw evidence of this during the Oklahoma City Bombing, 9/11, and now. The thing that equally amazes me is how much we blame each other, or a political party, or a system that either is or isn’t in place that somehow caused or should have stopped a crazed person as this. Disgusting. Just disgusting behavior. We can’t always know what tragedy will unfold at the hands of others. We just can’t.

When my wife and I first heard the news of the shooting I immediately got on the internet. I figured I’d see some up-to-date reporting on some of the major news agencies. What surprised me, and led me to blog something that was inaccurate, was the amount of misinformation that was being spewed all over the internet by these major networks as well as on television. I’m sure many Americans heard what I heard on television (Thankfully no one put this in print): “Gabrielle Giffords was shot point blank with a shotgun to the head, she has died, her husband–Mark E. Kelly–is on his way to the hospital in Arizona.”

See the Video in this link on the lower left part of the page that details the death report, then later a retraction:

Gabrielle Giffords – Dead – Shooting | Mediaite.

At first, upon realizing the above information was completely and totally inaccurate, my wife and I were outraged. I was outraged at the fact that news organizations have a tremendous responsibility to be accurate in what they report to its viewers and in this instance they were not. After the range of emotions, my wife and I had a solemn, mournful period maintaining silence over what we heard about a public servant, a little girl, and a judge among several others who were murdered with a shotgun. Later that day came the truth: Gabrielle Gibbons was alive. She’s alive? Yes, she was alive. She was not shot with a shotgun. I had blogged that she had passed. My anger grew throughout the day. I got sucked into the business of reporting when I should have stuck to blogging. That was my fault. I also trusted the media. That too was my fault.

That evening it struck me like a lightning bolt in a wet, empty field that spiders its electrical pulse as far as it can go: What if Gabrielle’s husband heard the same thing while on his way to the hospital? What if he heard his wife was dead, shot at point blank by a shotgun. Oh God, please let that not be true. Please God. I couldn’t imagine. I couldn’t imagine what that may have felt like. What would happen if the same thing happened to my wife and I had heard the news say she was dead? What would I think in hearing she was shot point blank in the head with a shotgun? Horrible. Horrifying. Sad. I am thankful she has lived, and he’s had the ability to see his wife alive.

No matter what I feel or what I say the only people who have a right to feel or say anything about the Arizona tragedy are the people who were there, and the loved ones who know those people. As I have learned from this, so should politicians and news media: Shut up. If you’re going to do anything do this: Report what you know and only what you know, send your good thoughts or prayers, and help. Stop reporting inaccuracies. Stop blaming liberals by stating they were involved in the Arizona tragedy to gain sympathy. Stop blaming conservatives by stating they were involved in the Arizona tragedy in order to eliminate an opponent. Be responsible. Be good…Please.

Media faces scrutiny after inaccurate Giffords reports – Yahoo! News.

As you can see I added some Tweets throughout my blog posting. This last one was the most interesting to me. Apparently Rush Limbaugh has never had anything to say via Twitter. Weird.