killing you softly with my words

A favorite word of mine through the years has been, “non-sequitur.” I suspect the hyphen is not correct because it is taken directly from Latin (so “non” is a word rather than a prefix) meaning, “it does not follow.”

Although it is a favorite word (or two-word combination) of mine, I cannot ever remember uttering it in context. Seems to me to be not quite fitting of coal trash to have such a robust lexicon. When I think of such things, I recall leaving the courthouse one day (I had a hearing of some kind in a neighboring county). I walked past a group of lawyers that did not give me, a lawyer from away, even a nod. One was saying to the group, “… not sure, I mean, he couldn’t even propound an appropriate inquiry!” Wasn’t a reference to my courtroom work (I’m a good propounderistarianer), but I thought as I walked by, “… douchebag. They don't give out nickels for big words anymore.”

I use my share of long words, but as one of my graduate students wrote on a course eval, “You use a lot of big words, but you use them all correctly. It’s refreshing.” And, to me, therein lies the issue. Words communicate. The simpler the word, the more likely your message will be communicated. Sometimes longer words are needed – just be sure to know what they mean before you use them.

Little shit drives me nuts: “We are doing this to insure we get it right the first time.” Insure, as to financially underwrite? “That” is limiting; “which” is not. But, to me, misuse at this level is just lazy, and it’s OK to be lazy. We all are in some areas of our lives including, big time, me. However, when people go out of their way to use words they do not understand just to use a big word, then you know they are not trying to communicate, but to impress.

“Impress: to press (a thing) into or on something.” Isn’t that what Charmin is for?

Could we say, in light of the above, that one who uses big words for the very sake of their length and that flushing sound one hears typically from behind a closed interior door in a residential environment is, empirically, the antithesis of a non sequitur? Methinks, without measureable trepidation of the prospect of contradiction, that such is an accurate manner in which to describe the state of affairs. In short, if you do not know the difference between “didactic” and “pedantic” then do not use either.

Naw, not being a dick, just tired of pseudo-intellectuals.

Alright, enough pompous bullshit. Soapbox to the right; me to the left.

Here’s a good story: “In 1386, the tribunal of Falaise sentenced a sow to be mangled and maimed in the head and forelegs, and then to be hanged, for having torn the face and arms of a child and thus caused its death. … As if to make the travesty of justice complete, the sow was dressed in man's clothes and executed on the public square near the city-hall at an expense to the state of ten sous and ten deniers, besides a pair of gloves to the hangman.” – E.P. Evans, The Criminal Prosecution and Capital Punishment of Animals, 1906 This site is full of good stories.

Good rule from my twin: if it wasn’t food a hundred years ago, it isn’t food now.

This sounds good:

Autumn Roasted Vegetable Salad

Ingredients

1 (8 oz.) yam, peeled and diced to 1-inch
1 (6 oz.) granny smith apple, peeled, cored and diced to 1-inch
1 (6 oz.) red onion, diced to 1-inch
2 tbsp. olive oil, split
salt and pepper to taste
2 tsp. balsamic vinegar
1 tsp. Dijon mustard
1/2 cup sliced California Ripe Olives
2 cups mixed baby greens
1/4 cup of chopped toasted cashews

Directions

In a large mixing bowl, toss yam, apple and red onion with 1 tablespoon of oil. Season with salt and pepper and scatter on one or two roasting pans in an even layer. Bake in a 450˚F oven for 20 minutes until golden. Remove from heat and allow to cool for 10 minutes. While cooling, whisk remaining oil, vinegar and mustard into mixing bowl. Toss in California Ripe Olives, baby greens and cooled vegetables. Top with cashews and serve. Serves 4. Courtesy of The California Olive Industry.

If you get off on articles that begin, “Almost one billion people throughout tropical and sub-tropical latitudes are infected with hookworms. In the countries affected, hookworm infection is often the major contributor to irondeficiency anemia, a direct consequence of the parasite’s bloodfeeding activities” then you can read the rest here - The bandit, a New DNA Transposon from a Hookworm - Possible Horizontal Genetic Transfer between Host and Parasite. The article is focused on DNA analysis. I can’t bring myself to show a pic of the things, but go for it if you like.

I started reading some articles on why lethal injection is “inhumane,” and then got sidetracked to other issues. Data from Amnesty International: In 2006, 91 per cent of all known executions took place in six countries: China, Iran, Pakistan, Iraq, Sudan and the USA. Based on public reports available, Amnesty International estimated that at least 1,010 people were executed in China during the year, although these figures are only the tip of the iceberg. Credible sources suggest that between 7,500 to 8,000 people were executed in 2006. The official statistics remain a state secret, making monitoring and analysis problematic.

Iran executed 177 people, Pakistan 82, and Iraq and Sudan each at least 65. There were 53 executions in 12 states in the USA.

Um, we set the internal toaster oven to "bake" for 53 people and you’re on our case? Shoo, fly, go away! Shoo!! Seems to me you’ve got more than enough work to do with China. Better go pout at the UN, eh? Further, if the 7:1 to 8:1 holds for China, you gotta know, brother, that is also good for Iran and the Sudan.

And don’t you just the love the opening crack – “91 per cent” in six countries. They are using a base of 1,591 executions. Wouldn’t “88 per cent in five countries” sound better? Narrow the culprits to just FIVE! Ah, but that would leave the US off the list.

How’s this for another twist? In point 11 not quite half way down: China reports executing about the same number of people in 2006 that the United States has executed for the past 30 years. That is Amnesty’s data, but not the way they want us to view it.

Here’s another set of data, different source, same year: China, at least 5,000 (approximately 8,000 according to Liu Renwen, Professor of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences); Iran, at least 215; Pakistan, 82; Iraq, at least 65; Sudan, at least 65; and United States, 53.

China’s number essential the same – a guess as to the total. Iran creeps up over 20%, and joins Iraq and the Sudan with the qualifier, “at least.” Seems the US role is shrinking by the article.

Want an observation? Where is Russia in all this? Ah, they have a moratorium on the death penalty. Why? Last paragraph of the link – Russia committed itself to scrapping the death penalty in 1997, when it signed a protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights. Money. Follow the money. It is routed in trade with the EU. Remember Russia in the 1990's? They were in economic freefall.

Butt hay, who needs the death penalty when you can murder your undesirables? But, Clyde! How can you say that! It, it, it’s so cold! Blow me – here’s the data:

Russia murders per 100,000 population: 201 (#5 on the hit parade)
US murders per 100,000 population: 42 (#24)
Weighted average for the world: 100

Gee, maybe there’s something to the theory.

Where did I get started on this tangent? Oh yeah, the “inhumane” nature of lethal injection. Here’s the scientific article saying it’s bad. Read it all, then come back and read this:

I grabbed this at random from Dead Man Eating:

SOUTH DAKOTA LAST MEAL
ELIJAH PAGE
July 11, 2007

Last Meal: Page had a final meal request of steak with A-1 sauce, jalapeno poppers with cream sauce, onion rings, and a salad with cherry tomatoes, ham chunks, shredded cheese, bacon bits, and blue cheese and ranch dressing. He wanted lemon iced tea and coffee to drink and ice cream for dessert.

The skinny: Page, 25, was executed for the torturing and killing a 19-year-old man following a robbery.

It was South Dakota's first execution in 60 years.

More skinny: Page and two other young men were convicted of killing a 19-year old "friend," near the town of Spearfish in the rural west of South Dakota.

The victim was kidnapped at gunpoint, then tortured for almost 3 hours before his death. He was forced to drink acid, repeatedly kicked and beaten, stabbed in the head and torso, and forced to remove his clothing in an icy creek.

His body was not found until a month later.

Upon his arrest in Texas, Page admitted his involvement in the murder. Page later pled guilty, received a death sentence, and waived appeals.

Accomplice Briley Piper, age 19, also pled guilty and was sentenced to death. Accomplice Darrell Hoadley, age 20, is serving a sentence of life without parole.

Last words and such: Asked if he had any last words, Page replied, "No." Asked if he understood the question Page responded, "Yes, no last words."

I really hope he enjoyed his jalapeño poppers. I wish I knew what flavor ice cream he asked for.

I also hope the execution procedure was a complete fuck-up, totally in line with the scientific article linked above.

Yes, the death penalty is retributive. Ain’t got nothing to do with general deterrence. It does, however, help the recidivism rate, eh?

the bad in "bad predictions"

I am somewhat reluctant to even write this post, let alone publish it. I found an article, the “Top 87 Bad Predictions about the Future”. I enjoyed reading it, but let’s retitle it, “Top 85 …”

It’s a good list except for the two political cracks. George the Elder “no new taxes” completely blows off the fact that the dems in Congress blatantly and publicly lied to set him up. They said the increases in taxes would be offset by decreases in spending, and the margin would dollar-for-dollar reduce the deficit. It was a political trade in the best interests of the country. Geo the Elder bit – then the dems bailed and crucified him. Not only did they not reduce spending, they increased it. A-holes top to bottom. The other crack is about Iraq and WMDs. Everyone thought – including Clinton – that they were there. We all had evidence they were there (just ask the Kurds), the UN required proof of destruction, and Iraq refused entry to sites to allow us to prove out their words – yeah, the Iraqi government lied plenty of times before, so they had no veracity on this topic. So this statement by Franks is on par with the rest of the list – space travel, light bulbs, television? I really detest political and social agendas buried in otherwise worthy reading. Childish of them. Degrades their work.

I’ll press ahead anyway because I am … um … me. Screw ‘em. Ain’t no lib with a sign that reads, “Bush lied and people died” gonna take away my fun. How’s this for a sign, “I have my head stuck so far up my ass that I can fart out my ears.” What a copy? Establish your lib credentials to me and I will have the sign made and shipped to you.

Onward.

«I see no good reasons why the views given in this volume should shock the religious sensibilities of anyone.» Charles Darwin, in the foreword to his book, The Origin of Species, 1869. Actually, I agree with him. It was not his work, but the abuse of it that has caused such turmoil. His work speaks only of evolution, not a word about creation. He can write all he wanted to about apes-to-men, but there was no fossil record of it and he admitted the same. He did say it existed, but just hadn’t been found. That was his scientific mistake. He should never speculate. Not good science. He found evidence of intra-species evolution and should have limited his speculation. Oh well.

«They couldn't hit an elephant at this dist-» Last words of Gen. John Sedgwick, spoken as he looked out over the parapet at enemy lines during the Battle of Spotsylvania on May 9, 1864, then promptly took a fatal shot. Here’s the full story: His corps was probing skirmish lines ahead of the left flank of Confederate defenses and he was directing artillery placements. Confederate sharpshooters were about 1,000 yards away and their shots caused members of his staff and artillerymen to duck for cover. Sedgwick strode around in the open and was quoted as saying, "What? Men dodging this way for single bullets? What will you do when they open fire along the whole line? I am ashamed of you. They couldn't hit an elephant at this distance." Although ashamed, his men continued to flinch and he repeated, "I'm ashamed of you, dodging that way. They couldn't hit an elephant at this distance." Just seconds later he fell forward with a bullet hole below his left eye. – Bet that left a mark, eh, John?

«... good enough for our transatlantic friends ... but unworthy of the attention of practical or scientific men.» British Parliamentary Committee, referring to Edison's light bulb, 1878. Ironic that the symbol for having an idea is now a light bulb above a head.

«There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home.» Ken Olson, president, chairman and founder of Digital Equipment Corp. (DEC), maker of big business mainframe computers, arguing against the PC in 1977. This caught my attention because I graduated high school that year. About six years later I bought my first home computer. I wonder if the statement is given more weight than he meant. It could have just been some marketing territory thing, a put-down of an upstart competitor.

«Lee DeForest has said in many newspapers and over his signature that it would be possible to transmit the human voice across the Atlantic before many years. Based on these absurd and deliberately misleading statements, the misguided public ... has been persuaded to purchase stock in his company ...» a U.S. District Attorney, prosecuting American inventor Lee DeForest for selling stock fraudulently through the mail for his Radio Telephone Company in 1913. What amazes me is when people think outside their profession. I understand the drill – for some trial work, I had to prepare to go (and did) toe-to-toe with docs and other professionals, attacking them in their field of expertise. But here, raising money to conduct scientific inquiry does not seem to rise to the level of a crime. It could have all been in the delivery – “I guaranty this can happen. Your returns on these investments will be no less than six-fold.” Those statements would be worthy of indictment, but would not make good fodder for a bad-quotations list.

«Space travel is utter bilge.» Richard Van Der Riet Woolley, upon assuming the post of Astronomer Royal in 1956. ”Bilge” is such a great word. American Heritage provides the following: “1. The rounded portion of a ship's hull, forming a transition between the bottom and the sides. The lowest inner part of a ship's hull. 2. Bilge water. 3. [Slang] Stupid talk or writing; nonsense. 4. The bulging part of a barrel or cask.” I am singularly unsatisfied with this list of definitions. The slang doesn’t seem to have a basis in the rest. Here’s the etymology: c. 1513, "lowest internal part of a ship," also "the foulness which collects there," variant of bulge "ship's hull." Ah, that makes sense. It is “stupid talk” as in “foul words.” So I wanted to see when the guy died (December 24, 1986) to get a lift out of what he saw in his lifetime, and I found the complete quote: "It's utter bilge. I don't think anybody will ever put up enough money to do such a thing . . . What good would it do us? If we spent the same amount of money on preparing first-class astronomical equipment we would learn much more about the universe . . . It is all rather rot." Ah, while there is a history in the guy (in 1936, reviewing P.E. Cleator's "Rockets in Space", he also said, "The whole procedure [of shooting rockets into space]...presents difficulties of so fundamental a nature, that we are forced to dismiss the notion as essentially impracticable, in spite of the author's insistent appeal to put aside prejudice and to recollect the supposed impossibility of heavier-than-air flight before it was actually accomplished"), the “bilge” quote seems to be taken out of context. I am becoming less enamored with this “list” as I go.

«A rocket will never be able to leave the Earth's atmosphere.» New York Times, 1936. Back on track. Nothing like the stupidity of the NYT on display to brighten my spirits. Commercial: “I read the NYT because it gives me a view of the news not available anywhere else.” Yes, but the problem with the “view” is that the sources are specious, the writing usually opinion appearing off the op-ed pages, and they have this kiss-my-ass attitude about anyone that differs with their world view. While I don’t mind, as a general statement, a KMA attitude, I do mind when it is them because, well, they are them. Know what I mean? They can kiss my ass.

«Atomic energy might be as good as our present-day explosives, but it is unlikely to produce anything very much more dangerous.» Winston Churchill, British Prime Minister, 1939. Fundamental problem: A politician speaking not of politics, but of science. Shudder.

«A man has been arrested in New York for attempting to extort funds from ignorant and superstitious people by exhibiting a device which he says will convey the human voice any distance over metallic wires so that it will be heard by the listener at the other end. He calls this instrument a telephone. Well-informed people know that it is impossible to transmit the human voice over wires.» News item in a New York newspaper, 1868. Is this the NYT incognito?

«Rail travel at high speed is not possible, because passengers, unable to breathe, would die of asphyxia.» Dr Dionysius Larder (1793-1859), professor of Natural Philosophy and Astronomy, University College London. [I had to correct the spelling of his first name from the source post.] It seems the comment was related to an assessment of a plan to have the government fund the construction of a broader gauge railroad track. An informative bit: “Brunel himself suggested that the opinions of other engineers should be sought and he was unlucky enough to be saddled with a Dr Dionysius Lardner who displayed a remarkable talent for drawing incorrect conclusions from observed data. Lardner attributed the poor performance of the company's best engine to the excessive air resistance of the wide locomotives and concluded that the broad gauge was inherently inferior. However, Brunel and Gooch found that it was back pressure due to misalignment of the blast pipe orifice and not air resistance which was the cause. After some hasty modifications to the engine they were able to haul nearly three times the load on but one third of the fuel used in Lardner's tests.” So, the statement was an extension of his (albeit incorrect) conclusion based upon observed data. Not as egregious as presented.

«The idea that cavalry will be replaced by these iron coaches is absurd. It is little short of treasonous.» Comment of Aide-de-camp to Field Marshal Haig, at tank demonstration, 1916. But, sir, when you hit the tank with a bullet, it goes “tink!” as opposed to the “ooooff!” you get from a horse or rider!

«Fooling around with alternating current is just a waste of time. Nobody will use it, ever.» Thomas Edison, American inventor, 1889 (Edison often ridiculed the arguments of competitor George Westinghouse for AC power). There are many quotes by Edison that I have read over the years of this ilk. The boy seems to have been a singularly disagreeable fellow. I suspect he was widely disliked by all but his fellow megalomaniacs of the time.

Alright, I’m done. But I did learn something … on balance, the article wasn’t fair. Oh well. Good thing I don’t pay for column inches.

eating roots

Logic games. 2 + 2 = 5, for particularly high values of 2. Is that logic or merely understanding the difference beginning truncating and formatting, or perhaps that engineers abhor truncation? If you are scared half to death two times without opportunity for recovery in between, do you die? Logic or assuming a fact not in evidence, ergo, one cannot literally be scared half to death.

What passes for logic in this world is oftentimes specious. Did you know that “oftentimes” is a word? Why shouldn’t it be, eh? “Sometimes” is ok; “anytime” is fine. I think oftentimes will become my new favorite word. I will use it in sentences oftentimes.

Come to think of it, “often” is pretty cool. Sounds soft, like a pussy cat. This is from the Online Etymology Dictionary: c.1300, extended form of oft (q.v.), originally before vowels and h-, probably by infl. of M.E. selden "seldom." In common use from 16c., replacing oft. Extended form oftentimes is attested from c.1430.

I used a word that is coming up on 600 years old. I am so proud of myself.

I knew it! I was having a conversation with my twin last night and the topic of the etymology of “snot” arose – or rather, shot out. I suspected that it was shortened from another word (you reading this?). Ta da! But before I stand too tall, I did believe that perhaps it was rooted in the expulsion of an object, and was shortened and applied to that which was expelled. But I was partially right! O.E. gesnot "nasal mucus," from P.Gmc. *snuttan (cf. O.Fris. snotta, M.L.G., M.Du. snotte, M.L.G. snute), from the same base as snout. O.E. also had a verb snite "wipe or pick one's nose." Meaning "despicable person" is from 1809. Snotty "impudent, curt, conceited" first recorded 1870; snotnose "upstart" is from 1941.

Funny how language lingers. Old English, “gesnot.” And today, “What’s that?!” “Oh, jus’ snot.” Remarkable.

I love the word, “cellar”: c.1225, from O.Fr. celer, from L. cellarium "pantry, storeroom," lit. "group of cells," from L. cella. I read a long, long time ago that “cellar door” is the most melodic phrase in the English language. I don’t know if that is true, but I have adopted it. Beautiful phrase.

I remember being at work when I in my mid-20s. This girl who worked with me – nice enough, probably a good person, but we just annoyed each other terribly – her last name was Moreno. I remember a VP had her name in a doc and spellchecked it. He laughed a little too loudly and said, “Hey, the closest word to ‘Moreno’ is ‘moron’!” I really don’t think anyone else heard it, and he was a very nice guy just finding humor in it. I laughed at the symmetry. Yeah, I was young and northern.

Moron: 1910, from Gk. (Attic) moron, neut. of moros "foolish, dull" (probably cognate with Skt. murah "idiotic;" L. morus "foolish" is a loan-word from Gk.). Adopted by the American Association for the Study of the Feeble-minded with a technical definition "adult with a mental age between 8 and 12;" used as an insult since 1922 and subsequently dropped from technical use. Linnæus had introduced morisis "idiocy."

Boy, coin the word one year, and twelve years later the northerners get their hands on it. I never realized how fundamental the Mason-Dixon Line was to a well-lived life until recently.

Speaking of being from the north, I learned the other day that you’re not supposed to say “butt” in front of strangers. Go figure! I mean, it was a nurse in a proctologist’s office. It wasn’t like I said, “Would you stick that in my butt?” Or, “Does my butt look fat in these jeans?” Nothing like that. Well, come to think of it, it was a variant of the first one. OK. Some things I just have to accept. I’m learning.

Been drifting back to Marc Bolan lately. Thirty years ago next month he ate a tree at some nasty-fast speed. Glam rock. What a great period in my life. I really enjoy the videos on you tube – search on t rex.

Got things to do. Later.