"But it's surely more noble to aim at a vocal style you admire than to talk down just for the sake of being matey."
--Andrew Martin's article: Our assault on class has led to the triumph of vulgarity
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Monday, July 28, 2008
Saturday, July 26, 2008
Water Aerobics
Hey Everyone,
As you know, upon the recommendation of my doctor I have been taking deep water aerobics classes here in Gaithersburg. I take the classes through a program called "wet yet water fitness" who coordinate with county and private pools in Montgomery County. I will be taking the classes in Fairfax at Providence Rec Center starting in the fall. Here is information for both the Montgomery County and Fairfax County classes. They should post the fall schedules soon.
http://wetyetwaterfitness.com/
Fairfax County Aqua Fitness
As you know, upon the recommendation of my doctor I have been taking deep water aerobics classes here in Gaithersburg. I take the classes through a program called "wet yet water fitness" who coordinate with county and private pools in Montgomery County. I will be taking the classes in Fairfax at Providence Rec Center starting in the fall. Here is information for both the Montgomery County and Fairfax County classes. They should post the fall schedules soon.
http://wetyetwaterfitness.com/
Fairfax County Aqua Fitness
Friday, July 25, 2008
Revisiting a great
Anglophiles rejoice. A saucy new film version of the beloved BBC series Brideshead Revisited begins showing everywhere on August first. With Charles (originally brilliantly portrayed by Jeremy Irons) the audience is drawn into a sordid wold of sin and decadence.
I have completed the 10 episodes which comprise the old series and found the role of the Marchmain's Catholic faith a confusing aspect of their lives. I suppose that's the point as it was confusing for them as well.
I suspect the new film will be more of a feast for the eyes and senses and hopefully will leave me feeling less despondent than the series did. Although the old series kept to the original text very well and satisfied my thirst for hearing good English, I am glad the depressing hours of watching Sebastian and the Marchmains self-destruct are over for now.
I have completed the 10 episodes which comprise the old series and found the role of the Marchmain's Catholic faith a confusing aspect of their lives. I suppose that's the point as it was confusing for them as well.
I suspect the new film will be more of a feast for the eyes and senses and hopefully will leave me feeling less despondent than the series did. Although the old series kept to the original text very well and satisfied my thirst for hearing good English, I am glad the depressing hours of watching Sebastian and the Marchmains self-destruct are over for now.
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
Crabby Lady
My elementary school, Fairhill elementary, kept a pair of pet hermit crabs in the library. We were given instructions on how to hold them and were allowed to pick them up on visits. One day a delicate, fair-skinned boy had his finger penetrated by one of the creature's strong pincers. He reacted by forcefully propelling the animal across the room. I'm not sure if the crab lived.
Aside from childhood interest, I cannot think of why a lady, set to retire, would choose hermit crabs as her household companions. I suppose it's slightly touching that these ugly crustaceans, sold with conch shells and dead blow fish in trashy beach- side stores to inevitably die in some child's room, have become precious pets to this particular person. The critter appealed to some part of her humanity and for this, I like her.
She had bible study in one of my mom's groups but has since moved to Florida (as you will see in the article.) I never met her but my mom, knowing my love of all things wild, sent me updates. It seems she and her molting friends have become small-time celebrities:
Hermit Crabs
Aside from childhood interest, I cannot think of why a lady, set to retire, would choose hermit crabs as her household companions. I suppose it's slightly touching that these ugly crustaceans, sold with conch shells and dead blow fish in trashy beach- side stores to inevitably die in some child's room, have become precious pets to this particular person. The critter appealed to some part of her humanity and for this, I like her.
She had bible study in one of my mom's groups but has since moved to Florida (as you will see in the article.) I never met her but my mom, knowing my love of all things wild, sent me updates. It seems she and her molting friends have become small-time celebrities:
Hermit Crabs
Saturday, July 19, 2008
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Lab humour:)
Who knew scientists had such a sense of humour? Well, I guess it's more the advertising company than the scientists but anyway ....
Just imagine yourself monotonously pipetting reagents and other scientific um, thingies hour after hour....when all of a sudden EP motion comes to your rescue with an appropriately corny boy band offering to automate this entire process for you. What could be better?
Just imagine yourself monotonously pipetting reagents and other scientific um, thingies hour after hour....when all of a sudden EP motion comes to your rescue with an appropriately corny boy band offering to automate this entire process for you. What could be better?
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
So anyway,
for more information on the summit (which actually is an excellent idea and still promotes a lot of good things for the world), check out this site:
http://www.g8.utoronto.ca/
http://www.g8.utoronto.ca/
G8 Summit
Every year eight of the most influential powers in the world meet with top economic and financial analysts to assemble plans that will address the most pressing matters affecting our world today. On the top of this list of issues are: disease and poverty in Africa, global warming and humanitarian violations such as the election in Zimbabwe.
Just in case demonstrators become too zealous in the expression of their frustrations and need to be contained, the summit is well prepared with numerous officers and the perimeters of the buildings are heavily barricaded. This year demonstrators were kept 2 miles from the actual meetings sites. Protesters are always reliable fixture at this event, their presence conveying their disappointment with nations who have the wealth and clout stop millions of peoples' suffering and yet every year, fail to do so.
The summit is essentially groups of a few wealthy people sitting around, determining the fate of everybody else. Most often, it results in empty promises and provisions for the distribution of less than inadequate funds.
It goes without saying that being the leader of the free world, the United States should set an ideological standard: it should be a role model for developing nations willing to sign on to the plans proposed during the summit. So, when the United States only promised to cut its current emissions by 50% by the year 2050, a goal that is much lower than could be accomplished, the rest of the world was a tad irritated.
This promise, however, was indeed quite ground breaking for our dear president who until recently, has failed to even acknowledge the effects of global warming. Scientists at the summit said that this was a missed opportunity and we will have to wait for the next president to commit to making substantial cuts in global warming pollution. Until we have a leader who is willing to take the necessary strides for humanitarian and environmental causes, the arctic will melt, animals will drift into extinction and millions of children will die while diseases eat away at their bodies and their parents are slaughtered by their own governments.
South Africa also had higher expectations:
The South African environment minister, Marthinus van Schalkwyk, called the long-term goal expressed by the G-8 to be an "empty slogan" and seemed to take a shot at the United States.
"We know very well that there are many countries in the G-8 grouping that share our ambitious expectations, and therefore it is regrettable that the lowest common denominator in the G-8 determined the level of ambition" in the declaration, van Schalkwyk said. (Washington Post).
By imposing sanctions on South Africa for the apartheid regime in the 1980's the United States caused the suffering and starvation of thousands of South Africans (black and white) who had little to do with the Apartheid government. This example merely illustrates how easy it is for the U.S to remain sanctimonious about their actions while the rest of the world suffers as a result. Perhaps those over zealous activists are partly correct in calling the leaders at the G8 hypocrites.
Although Bush doesn't believe in evolution he sure seems to believe in survival of the of the fittest. Born into privilege, he only looks out for himself and thoughtlessly destroys everyone in his path. One would hope that he would have used his privilege to help those less fortunate countries who so desperately need it. But then... we would be assuming that he himself has fully evolved. And we all know that's not true.
Just in case demonstrators become too zealous in the expression of their frustrations and need to be contained, the summit is well prepared with numerous officers and the perimeters of the buildings are heavily barricaded. This year demonstrators were kept 2 miles from the actual meetings sites. Protesters are always reliable fixture at this event, their presence conveying their disappointment with nations who have the wealth and clout stop millions of peoples' suffering and yet every year, fail to do so.
The summit is essentially groups of a few wealthy people sitting around, determining the fate of everybody else. Most often, it results in empty promises and provisions for the distribution of less than inadequate funds.
It goes without saying that being the leader of the free world, the United States should set an ideological standard: it should be a role model for developing nations willing to sign on to the plans proposed during the summit. So, when the United States only promised to cut its current emissions by 50% by the year 2050, a goal that is much lower than could be accomplished, the rest of the world was a tad irritated.
This promise, however, was indeed quite ground breaking for our dear president who until recently, has failed to even acknowledge the effects of global warming. Scientists at the summit said that this was a missed opportunity and we will have to wait for the next president to commit to making substantial cuts in global warming pollution. Until we have a leader who is willing to take the necessary strides for humanitarian and environmental causes, the arctic will melt, animals will drift into extinction and millions of children will die while diseases eat away at their bodies and their parents are slaughtered by their own governments.
South Africa also had higher expectations:
The South African environment minister, Marthinus van Schalkwyk, called the long-term goal expressed by the G-8 to be an "empty slogan" and seemed to take a shot at the United States.
"We know very well that there are many countries in the G-8 grouping that share our ambitious expectations, and therefore it is regrettable that the lowest common denominator in the G-8 determined the level of ambition" in the declaration, van Schalkwyk said. (Washington Post).
By imposing sanctions on South Africa for the apartheid regime in the 1980's the United States caused the suffering and starvation of thousands of South Africans (black and white) who had little to do with the Apartheid government. This example merely illustrates how easy it is for the U.S to remain sanctimonious about their actions while the rest of the world suffers as a result. Perhaps those over zealous activists are partly correct in calling the leaders at the G8 hypocrites.
Although Bush doesn't believe in evolution he sure seems to believe in survival of the of the fittest. Born into privilege, he only looks out for himself and thoughtlessly destroys everyone in his path. One would hope that he would have used his privilege to help those less fortunate countries who so desperately need it. But then... we would be assuming that he himself has fully evolved. And we all know that's not true.
Monday, July 7, 2008
You've got the Wright stuff baby
I know this is old news but I stumbled upon this video today and thought it was funny.
Whose line is it anyway?
That catchy comedy show's title is pulled together by one very important word that many people mix up: when to use who's vs. when to use whose. It's one of those things that you don't think about until you have to use it correctly.
The confusion here is due to the apostrophe, which on 99% of English words indicates possession, but here simply indicates a contraction. If you can replace the word with who is or who has, use who's. If not, use whose.
When researching this, I thought that it seemed to be the same rule that applies to it's vs. its. Many students write it's thinking that the apostrophe shows possession when in fact it indicates a contraction of it is. Similarly, Who's=who is.
A simple explanation of this idea can be found at a blog called check grammar .
EXAMPLES
Who's
Who's watching TV?
Do you know who's going to speak?
Who's ready to go?
Who's in the kitchen?
Who's this?
Who's already eaten?
Whose
Whose is the possessive of who or, somewhat controversially, which.
Whose book is this?
Do you know whose car this is?
I know a woman whose kids study there.
Whose side are you on?
An idea whose time has come.
For those desiring more practice, this page provides some examples:
practice
Although I often use it in this way, using whose as the possessive of which is somewhat controversial with some professors.
The confusion here is due to the apostrophe, which on 99% of English words indicates possession, but here simply indicates a contraction. If you can replace the word with who is or who has, use who's. If not, use whose.
When researching this, I thought that it seemed to be the same rule that applies to it's vs. its. Many students write it's thinking that the apostrophe shows possession when in fact it indicates a contraction of it is. Similarly, Who's=who is.
A simple explanation of this idea can be found at a blog called check grammar .
EXAMPLES
Who's
Who's watching TV?
Do you know who's going to speak?
Who's ready to go?
Who's in the kitchen?
Who's this?
Who's already eaten?
Whose
Whose is the possessive of who or, somewhat controversially, which.
Whose book is this?
Do you know whose car this is?
I know a woman whose kids study there.
Whose side are you on?
An idea whose time has come.
For those desiring more practice, this page provides some examples:
practice
Although I often use it in this way, using whose as the possessive of which is somewhat controversial with some professors.
Saturday, July 5, 2008
Breaking News from the Onion
Bush Acknowledges Existence Of Carbon Dioxide
Onion News WASHINGTON—In an unexpected reversal that environmentalists and scientists worldwide are calling groundbreaking, President George W. Bush, for the first time in his political career, openly admitted to the existence of carbon dioxide following the release of the new U.N. Global Environment Outlook this October.
"Carbon dioxide, a molecule which contains one atom of carbon bonded with two atoms of oxygen, is a naturally occurring colorless gas exhaled by humans and metabolized, in turn, by plants," Bush told a stunned White House press corps. "As a leading industrialized nation, we can no longer afford to ignore the growing consensus of so many experts whose job it is to study our atmosphere. Carbon dioxide is real."
Because carbon dioxide, which was first described by 17th-century Flemish physician Jan Baptista van Helmont as a gas he referred to as "spiritus silvestre," has long been denied by the Bush administration, the president's speech was widely hailed as a victory for advocates of empirically established scientific fact.
"This has been a major step forward for national basic-chemistry policy," said longtime CO2 proponent and eighth-grade science teacher Linda Mattson. "By taking this brave stance, Bush has opened the door for the eventual acknowledgment that other molecular compounds, such as H20, for example, may in fact exist as well."
Many of those whom Bush has long considered to be his most loyal followers, however, have expressed disappointment with the development.
"There is nothing about any 'carbon dioxide' in the Bible," said Rev. Luke Hatfield of Christchurch Ministries in Topeka, KS. "What's next? Claims that so-called 'fossil' fuels come from mythical creatures like dinosaurs? This has been a sad step backward for our nation."
A White House spokesman was careful to categorize the announcement as "cautious," and reiterated that the president is still not ready to take any position on the existence of polar ice caps, ozone, or a controversial idea held by many scientists and often referred to as "weather."
Nuh uhhh. I simply don't believe it. Carbon Dioxide?
Onion News WASHINGTON—In an unexpected reversal that environmentalists and scientists worldwide are calling groundbreaking, President George W. Bush, for the first time in his political career, openly admitted to the existence of carbon dioxide following the release of the new U.N. Global Environment Outlook this October.
"Carbon dioxide, a molecule which contains one atom of carbon bonded with two atoms of oxygen, is a naturally occurring colorless gas exhaled by humans and metabolized, in turn, by plants," Bush told a stunned White House press corps. "As a leading industrialized nation, we can no longer afford to ignore the growing consensus of so many experts whose job it is to study our atmosphere. Carbon dioxide is real."
Because carbon dioxide, which was first described by 17th-century Flemish physician Jan Baptista van Helmont as a gas he referred to as "spiritus silvestre," has long been denied by the Bush administration, the president's speech was widely hailed as a victory for advocates of empirically established scientific fact.
"This has been a major step forward for national basic-chemistry policy," said longtime CO2 proponent and eighth-grade science teacher Linda Mattson. "By taking this brave stance, Bush has opened the door for the eventual acknowledgment that other molecular compounds, such as H20, for example, may in fact exist as well."
Many of those whom Bush has long considered to be his most loyal followers, however, have expressed disappointment with the development.
"There is nothing about any 'carbon dioxide' in the Bible," said Rev. Luke Hatfield of Christchurch Ministries in Topeka, KS. "What's next? Claims that so-called 'fossil' fuels come from mythical creatures like dinosaurs? This has been a sad step backward for our nation."
A White House spokesman was careful to categorize the announcement as "cautious," and reiterated that the president is still not ready to take any position on the existence of polar ice caps, ozone, or a controversial idea held by many scientists and often referred to as "weather."
Nuh uhhh. I simply don't believe it. Carbon Dioxide?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)