Saturday, September 10, 2011

Who Shot The Water Buffalo? by Ken Babbs

Saturday, August 6, 2011

Matthew 23 King James Version (KJV)

Matthew 23

King James Version (KJV)

Matthew 23

¹Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples,
²Saying The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat:
³All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.
⁴For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.
⁵But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments,
⁶And love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues,
⁷And greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi.
⁸But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.
⁹And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.
¹⁰Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.
¹¹But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant.
¹²And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.
¹³But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.
¹⁴Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation.
¹⁵Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.
¹⁶Woe unto you, ye blind guides, which say, Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the temple, he is a debtor!
¹⁷Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gold, or the temple that sanctifieth the gold?
¹⁸And, Whosoever shall swear by the altar, it is nothing; but whosoever sweareth by the gift that is upon it, he is guilty.
¹⁹Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gift, or the altar that sanctifieth the gift?
²⁰Whoso therefore shall swear by the altar, sweareth by it, and by all things thereon.
²¹And whoso shall swear by the temple, sweareth by it, and by him that dwelleth therein.
²²And he that shall swear by heaven, sweareth by the throne of God, and by him that sitteth thereon.
²³Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.
²⁴Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.
²⁵Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess.
²⁶Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also.
²⁷Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness.
²⁸Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.
²⁹Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous,
³⁰And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.
³¹Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets.
³²Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers.
³³Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?
³⁴Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:
³⁵That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.
³⁶Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.
³⁷O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
³⁸Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
³⁹For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.

Sunday, January 2, 2011

The Climate Crisis And The Defend Science Email I Got Today

Defend-Science-Email Inbox X Reply mail@defendscience.org to ericabrahamson show details 3:46 PM (2 hours ago) Letter to Signatories (Jan 2, 2011) The climate crisis and the assault on science Any objective assessment of climate change and the development of the science climate change can only conclude: climate change is continuing relentlessly; climate science has continued to develop a deeper understanding of why that is happening and its very dangerous implications; human society's greenhouse gas emissions is driving global warming. But instead of the public understanding of this getting clearer and determined global action beginning in earnest, the last year has seen the opposite - significantly because of a relentless assault on climate science. This assault is not based on reason or on evidence - it is driven by economic, political, and ideological currents and compulsions and not by the reality of what human society is doing neither to the planet, nor by flaws or weaknesses in climate science. And unfortunately, in the face of this, many who have once taken better positions have been intimidated or retreated, and in particular the positions taken by the US government have continued to fall far short of taking responsibility for the future of the planet. In this situation, the role of scientists speaking in defense of a scientific understanding of what is going on has great importance. Three short years ago, the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) and Al Gore were awarded the Nobel Prize for their work in alerting the public to the dangers of global warming. In 2008, after 8 years of harassment, suppression and distortion of the work of climate scientists by the Bush administration, Bush was forced to release a court-mandated Scientific Assessment on climate that stated that human-driven climate change will damage ecosystems and pose challenges to key sectors of the U.S. economy including agriculture and energy. This report was in large part based on recent reports from the IPCC. It also stated that climate change was very likely due to human activities. (see http://www.climatescience.gov/Library/scientific-assessment/Scientific-AssessmentFINAL.pdf ) Some may not recall that cap-and-trade (flawed and limited as it is as a solution for reducing carbon emissions) was originally put forward by the Republican party, as a move in opposition to more direct proposals to directly limit greenhouse emissions. As candidates in 2008, John McCain and Sarah Palin both proposed to reduce global warming pollution via a cap-and-trade program. There were noisy global warming doubters, deniers and skeptics, including James Inhofe, the senator from Oklahoma who dismisses global warming as a hoax but in the main they were regarded as fringe elements. As the Obama administration prepared to take office, the basic facts and conclusions that form the overwhelming scientific consensus about global warming and the role of human-produced carbon emissions seemed to many to be on the verge of becoming well understood in U.S. society. In stark contrast, today, the US is the only developed country in the world that has a powerful mainstream party that denies global warming science. Today extremists like Inhofe are not isolated fringe elements, but are setting terms for the mainstream of the Republican party. As reported in a recent L.A.Times article, written just before the mid-term elections: “Skepticism about human technology's role in accelerating climate change, and doubt concerning the phenomenon's very existence, have become, at least on the Republican side, a matter of lock-step partisan orthodoxy. (emphasis Defend Science) For example, 19 of the 20 GOP candidates who are in closely contested races and have expressed a position on the issue say they have doubts about the scientific evidence for global warming, despite the overwhelming consensus among scientists. That includes Arizona's John McCain, who formerly supported legislation to reduce carbon emissions. Mark Kirk of Illinois, who voted for cap-and-trade as a congressman, is the lone Republican holdout. Some of the other senatorial candidates express ambivalence about the science but firmly reject any legislative or regulatory remedy; more agree with Louisiana's David Vitter, who calls the evidence for climate change "pseudo-science garbage."” ("Delusions, dollars and climate", October 30, 2010) James Sensenbrenner, notorious climate change “skeptic” is now set to become the vice chairman of the House Science Committee. In 2009 he attempted a McCarthyite move to have all climate scientists whose names appeared in the stolen so-called “climate-gate” emails blacklisted from participation in the IPCC’s reports. And as for the Democrats, in the face of mounting scientific evidence of the climate crisis, with CO2 levels reaching 390 ppm, going into the Cancun climate talks the government abandoned even the attempt to actually arrive at an international agreement now that would limit carbon emissions. This so-called "realism" will be the death of the planet. (see footnote 1) What Happened? And what does it mean, for science and society? A concerted attack on science under the name “climate-gate” happened for starters. “With the publication of damaging e-mails from a climate research center in Britain, the radical environmental movement appears to face a tipping point. The revelation of appalling actions by so-called climate change experts allows the American public to finally understand the concerns so many of us have articulated on this issue.” (Washington Post, Wednesday, December 9, 2009, op-ed by Sarah Palin on the politicization of the Copenhagen climate conference) You knew something was very wrong when Sarah Palin stepped forward as a defender of the “integrity of science” – and the Washington Post gave her op-ed space to do so. The virulent stream of anti-science know-nothingism and denial of reality that has always characterized a major part of the American response to the science of global warming reached a crescendo going into the December, 2009 Copenhagen climate talks. A key part of this was triggered by the illegally hacked emails from the University of East Anglia’s Climactic Research Center in the U.K. What started out as a right-wing assault on climate scientists was turned into a supposed "climate-gate" significantly by the mainstream press! There are a number of important parallels here with the attacks on evolution (as well as some differences). One basic point is that the virulence of the attacks has nothing to do with weaknesses in either evolution or global warming science – both these attacks stem from political, ideological and economic causes. A second is that both of them have tapped into and helped feed the dangerous current in this culture which is opposed to scientific thinking as a whole. And a third is that while there are differences between those mobilized around creationist banners and those opposing global warming, there is also quite a lot in common in these circles – and they are both mixed together in the right-wing populist milieu that has given birth to the “tea party”, “birthers”, and others. (see footnote 2) The goal of the “climate-gate” attackers is not confined to generally attacking and throwing doubt on climate science but includes trying to threaten and intimidate climate scientists from speaking out publicly on these questions that are vital for all of humanity, and to cast doubt and confusion on science itself. And what makes all of this increasingly dangerous is that the overall political initiative is in the hands of these right wing forces, and mainstream political forces have adopted a defensive posture towards the “climate-gaters” and their “charges” - in effect giving them both more public credibility than they ever deserved. There have been some positive exceptions to this trend: 250 members of the U.S. National Academies of Science signed an open letter in opposition to these attacks “Climate Change and the Integrity of Science” (appeared in Science Magazine May 7, 2010 http://www.sciencemag.org/content/328/5979/689.full ) Also, among climate scientists there have been some initial efforts to counter this anti-science wave. The Climate Science Rapid Response Team was formed as “a match-making service between top scientists and members of the media and office holders and their staffs from various levels of government...The group is committed to providing rapid, high-quality information to media and government officials.” Cancun: 'lowered expectations' means giving up on stopping global warming In the months going into Cancun, it seemed that the watchword of what could be accomplished at the talks was "lower expectations", and then, "lower them again." What this meant was that any attempt to talk about meaningful measures to actually do anything to reduce carbon emissions in a serious way was cast off as going against political realism. We cannot here fully assess what happened at Cancun - but the talks did indeed completely fail to do anything serious to lower carbon emissions, and this was hailed as progress by the chief US negotiator. All this – the seemingly unending assault on global warming science and scientists the emergence of a hard-core of climate science deniers with a great deal of political power and influence in Congress and the government more generally failure of those with real power who have at least talked about doing something serious about climate change to confront the hard reality of what the physics and chemistry and biology of carbon are telling us all of this has had mutually re-enforcing negative impact. Science is not being strongly defended in the face of these attacks. Anti-scientific rhetoric is promoted and allowed to run unchecked polluting the political environment much as the gulf oil spill spewed contaminants into the natural environment. And in turn these largely unanswered attacks on science are further deepening a political climate of accepting continued reliance on fossil fuels. All of this reflects, re-enforces and perpetuates the deep structural dependence of the U.S. and world economy on fossil fuels. Major damage is occurring to the broad public's understanding of science, the scientific method and its ability to know how to understand and change the world for the better at a time when that understanding is crucially needed. And humanity is losing precious time in responding to what really is a planet-wide emergency. Footnotes: footnote 1: The upper safe limit for atmospheric CO2 is 350 parts per million (pps). Atmospheric CO2 levels have stayed higher than 350 ppm since early 1988. See Target Atmospheric CO2: Where should humanity aim? Hansen et al: footnote 2: Anti-science forces attacking climate science have injected a very deliberate mis-understanding of what “uncertainty” in science means. They want people to confuse the scientific concept of uncertainty ranges in measurements and in particular quantitative predictions made by scientific theories with overall uncertainty, then on to doubt and then to rejection of climate science itself. The methodology behind this deliberate confusion around “uncertainty” is very similar to what anti-evolution forces do when they try to convince the public that evolution is “just a theory”. All of this represents continued attempts to mis-educate the public with anti-scientific thinking. This phony argument about “uncertainty” has been picked up, given wide exposure and treated as a legitimate issue in an unfortunately typical “even-handed” way by various media. Defend Science This commentary is available on line at: http://www.defendscience.com/ds_commentary18.html http://www.defendscience.org email: mail@defendscience.com

Friday, December 17, 2010

Some Thoughts, 12/16/2010

JOURNAL VIII

Thursday, December 16, 2010

I was thinking about when my sister wanted me to go in a nursing home in 2003, and I was, like: “My primary care physician from Cedars-Sinai Hospital in Beverly Hills, Dr. Edward Riceberg says, “You can work and live independently,” and, “You will live 20 or 30 more years,” and she’s, “I talked to Dr. Riceberg,” and he denies it, “It was a bad connection.” And psychiatrist Dr. Robert Newport lost his medical license, “I’m not a psychiatrist anymore, I’m a painter.” Joan: “Dr. Riceberg says you don’t have diabetes.” And when I protest, “The nurse told me,” also false, seriously.

So if I’m supposed to get that all the medical was too expensive, with the Anthem Blue Cross PPO, meds, medical bills, the $60K/year for all my living expenses for being a jr. computer science major at CSUN having 3 emergency surgeries…. She wanted me to go in the nursing home 2 years after the surgeries and I was OK, doing fine. The doctors and lawyers told me say no, “You don’t have to do anything you don’t want to.” But she should have told me we needed to trim the medical expenses because I had spared no expense on the surgeries and I had doubled up on some of the specialists and never discharged the first ones, even tripled or quadrupled on some trying different ones, trying to find the best one for me, or the one I liked the best. Laurie had told me that to select a psychiatrist, which is what they had told me to do when they asked me to find Dr. Newport, and I had not one doctor in the world, and needed none, is to try different ones until you find the one you like, and I did that with the colo-rectal surgeons for the colon resection for diverticulits. Then they would want a new primary care, and I had 2. I could have discharged the first one, gotten the medical records, gotten weaned off any meds if necessary, or had the prescriptions transferred to the new primary care. Some of my meds were prescribed by the first primary care, and some by the second. Jonathan had always asserted that he was the Richest Man in Babylon, and everyone believed him, those days; I could get in anywhere. Maybe that was a 2-edged sword, since I was spending his money. But we never communicated at all about the finances of the surgeries and many of the details. Forgiveness is OK with me—nobody knew. One day I was driving down the street, had a funny pain, went to the ER, and the next thing I knew I was set up for 2 emergency surgeries, an angiogram and an angioplasty for and a colon resection for diverticultis, at the same time, highly unusual, and I’m still here, hallelujah! Even when I was a fundie, Pastor Dunbar preached, “If the healing line doesn’t take, I’ll find the best specialist in the world.” A male nurse told me once at a party at Laurie’s law professor friend’s apartment “find the best [whatever] in Beverly Hills”.

So I had 2 primary cares, 2 cardiologists, 2 colo-rectal surgeons, I don’t know how many psychiatrists, 4 opthamologists, an endocrinologist, 2 neurologists, and an orthopedist (sports medicine) at that moment. I never got to trim the branches of my doctor tree to this day. I got a stomach pain; UCLA ER triaged me, we went home, then went to UCLA-Santa Monica ER where I knew Dr. Mark Grossman from the Urgent Care on Wilshire. I was in there for 5 days on IV Dilaudid to kill the pain for diverticulits, and I had to have an emergency colon resection—they almost did it right there, surgeon Dr. Schechter. I saw a billboard for Cedars-Sinai Hospital near our friends’ apartment near Beverly Center shopping mall, called 1-800-CEDARS1, the referral phone number, and they referred me to colo-rectal surgeon Dr. Gary Hoffman on Canon and Brighton in Beverly Hills, across the street from Smith and Hawken. He said, “Switch your primary care to Dr. Edward Riceberg downstairs before the operation,” and I did, but I never told Dr. Grossman for some reason that I was leaving. Maybe I didn’t know I was leaving. Also, at the same time I had gone to another ER for chest pains, been referred to a cardiologist near the Howard Hughes Center, missed the appointment, and they referred me to cardiologist Dr. Ravi Dave` at UCLA-Santa Monica Cardiology, right across the street from the hospital, on 16th. He said right away he had to do an emergency angiogram and angioplasty in 5 days, but Joan said, “wait 3 weeks”. Later Dr. Dave` said, “I wanted to do the surgery in 5 days.” It came out unsuccessful; the particular physiology of my heart is such that they can’t get the wire through from my thigh to clean out the artery or put in a stent, “but we’ll treat it with medication”. Everybody was worried, but I guess it’s working, because I’m still here, and the cardiologist says, “Your heart’s in good shape,” and also my high blood pressure went normal and I said, “Because of the vegan diet and exercise,” and he said, “Because of the medication”. I ought to send this to all of my caregivers, because this is maybe a good way of communicating the kind of details I’m thinking I/we missed. Maybe I forgot to say. I thought they were talking to the doctors and surgeons, for some reason. They said my dad died on the table during his angioplasty and revived, and there is a 10% risk of dying during the operation. I was reading a lot of “death” books by Stephen Levine and Ram Dass like Who Dies and One Year To Live and, sorry—I was in a different space, just in case—it could have happened, I know. Maybe some people mistook this that the doctor said I was terminal when they said I would live 20 or 30 years. That’s why I quoted nurse Karen, “Think positive.”

After the operation I was supposed to go to the cardiac rehab to learn diet, exercise, and lifestyle changes for heart patients. Clinton had a triple bypass and Dr. Dave` said: “You will never need a bypass,” and I haven’t had one. It’s important to avoid stress, a risk factor for heart disease and heart attack. When he was President, they always showed him at McDonalds eating cholesterol (meat, dairy, and egg yolks). that clog your arteries. Mine was probably metabolic syndrome, diabetes, a side effect of Risperdal. I’ve always been, and still am, totally healthy, like Jack LaLanne. Chaney was having heart surgery the same week as me, and my sister was Chairman of the Barbara Bush Literacy Campaign and Assistant Chief of Staff to Vice-President H.W. Bush in the Ronald Reagan White House, a Bel-Air lawyer. I half-expected to see TV cameras come in with Joan to the Intensive Care Unit after the operation. You always brag about your family to the doctors and the nurses, and my mother was on the San Francisco School Board for six years, two years as President, worked in Mayor Dianne Feinstein’s Office of Childcare, and was appointed to the S.F. Human Rights Commission by Mayor Frank Jordan, the former Police Chief. I went to Yale before my sister, Class of ’71, Pierson College, Philosophy and Religious Studies Major, I’m a web developer, programmer, and technical support engineer for aNet Communications, an ISP in Los Angeles near Beverly Hills doing e-commerce solutions, web hosting, and web site design and a junior computer science major at California State University, Northridge. My brother–in-law heads the Department of International Relations at University of Southern California. My father was a restauranteur with three restaurants in San Francisco and an institutional furniture salesman for Thonet and American Chair Co. in the Merchandise Mart on Market and 10th St. He has a pacemaker and had several angioplasties. [He just died at 88. Mom’s going strong at 89. Grandma died at 105 with our longevity genes.[which never meant much to me till I passed 60] Jonathan’s father sold the bank he owned in St. Louis.

If it ever happens again, God forbid, I should throw in my brother is a licensed acupuncturist in Sedona, Arizona. After the angioplasty, Dr. Grossman handed me a bottle of nitro and said, “If you get any chest pains take one, wait 5 minutes, if they’re still there, take another, wait 5 minutes, if they’re still there take a third (put it under your tongue); if you still have chest pains after the 3rd nitro go to the nearest emergency room to make sure it isn’t a heart attack.” Then they use the paddles and say, “Clear”. If I was OK and they sent me home, Jonathan would hit the roof. He said, “Every time you take nitroglycerin and call the ambulance to go to the emergency room for chest pains, and you’re OK and they send you home it costs $4000 for nothing. Try not to do it except in [something like the direst emergencies].” He doesn’t understand there’s no way of knowing. It’s doctor’s orders. If you’re OK the ER doctors and nurses and your doctors will always say, “Better be safe than sorry,” and, “Don’t take chances.” It’s a standard procedure they all know and take for granted, he has no comprehension, and they refuse to speak to the doctors, claim they did, and make up bad things the doctor never said that offend both them and the patient and the nurses badly. A doctor lost his license in a fight! Maybe if I’d gotten the car they promised, showed me, took, and reneged, and I’d finished cardiac rehab I would have learned how to invest them, my family and caregivers, with this essential information that even nurses and EMT’s, and they are PhD’s, understand. I say it’s their responsibility; I’m the one on the table going under the knife. The caregivers are not supposed to be killing the patient to steal the insurance money. I didn’t need 2 primary cares, and I didn’t need to keep a ritzy primary care in Beverly Hills…I was planning to move up where my friends in Seattle lived anyway. I never really told Dr. Schechter about Dr. Hoffman—I don’t know. The colon resection was totally successful, no problem. Since first I moved my colo-rectal surgeon from UCLA-Santa Monica to Cedars-Sinai, and he wanted me to move my primary care, I got a referral to cardiologist Dr. William Mandel at Cardiovascular Medical Group of Southern California from Cedars-Sinai in Beverly Hills, so I had 2 cardiologists. I never told them about him because they were always yelling about the nitro, they probably never talked to the doctor, they refused to listen to me and let me talk, and I doubt they understand it to this day. I was imminently going to Washington anyway when she brought up that nursing home bullshit, so it didn’t matter, I was going to discharge both of them anyway, a tremendous saving! My friend had invited me to come up years ago and then pushed the date back to April, 2003, the exact time Joan hit me with nursing home. (The friend was a social worker.) My plan was to look into just finding a job and staying, seeing if Laurie wanted to come up and stay if she liked it, and telling my family to keep the $60K except for meds, medical bills, and Blue Cross PPO. I put that on the computer somewhere and Joan and Pete must have read it because when they told me they were stopping the $60K (actually, first Dr. Stubbeman said stop $30K but match every dollar u earn; they said stop the other $30 K except for meds, medical bills, and [Anthem] Blue Cross PPO premiums).

It suggests to me that they got the idea from me and did it to me before I had a chance to go. It really seems unforgivable. The orthopedist (sports medicine) guy in Westwood near the UCLA campus who diagnosed the diabetic neuropathy (and X-rayed my back once before) was now unneeded and needed to be discharged. Laurie (where I lived) graduated from UCLA in psychology. I was going to check out with all the opthamologists, neurologists, the endocrinologist, Dr. Hohnichter from Cedars-Sinai on Rexford St. in Beverly Hills, and the psychiatrists when I moved to Washington, and find new doctors up there. My license had just been renewed after a year’s suspension and I was preparing to rent a Budget rental car to drive up, I got a new silver Ford Focus the time before. The reviews said they had good brakes, which is true. So I can see that I maybe was spending too much money, on the medical, but it’s not the answer to throw it in the doctors’ and the patient’s face. We still may be paying for unneceessry things by not discussing it out front. The caregivers insisted on ignoring the doctors’ orders; they wouldn’t even listen. “[The doctors] are wrong” Joan has said many times and they are not. I say she’s wrong. Or, “Dr. Fine didn’t say that,” when that’s exactly what she said, or put words in their mouth that they never said, couldn’t possibly have said, because she was greater, she was the ruler.

I was discussing with Tina yesterday a psychology book I read at Yale, maybe in Psych 1A and am planning to re-read, Man’s Search For Meaning by psychiatrist Dr. Viktor Frankl. He survived Auschwitz or one of the concentration camps in Hitler’s Nazi Germany, came to America, an invented a whole school of psychiatry, I’ll fill in the name:.

For plain text computers: The landmark bestseller by the great Viennese psychiatrist remembered for his tremendous impact on humanity, Man’s Search For Meaning. Internationally renowned psychiatrist Viktor E. Frankl endured years of unspeakable horror in Nazi death camps. During, and partly because of his suffering, Dr. Frankl developed a revolutionary approach to psychotherapy known as logotherapy. At the core of his theory is the belief that man’s primary motivational force is his search for meaning.

Cited in Dr. Frankl’s New York Times obituary in 1997 as “an enduring work of survival literature,” MAN’S SEARCH FOR MEANING is more than the story of Viktor E. Frankl’s triumph; it is a remarkable blend of science and humanism and “an introduction to the most significant psychological movement of our day” (Gordon W. Allport).

“Perhaps the most significant thinking since Freud and Adler. Unconditional faith in an unconditional meaning is Dr. Frankl’s message to the reader.”—The American Journal of Psychiatry

OVER TWO MILLION COPIES SOLD!

This mysteriously popped up while I was googling Amazon.com:

ZYGONE

Wanta yak with the Capn? Click on:

YAK

Give them what they want. Give them their money's worth.

-- skypilotclub motto

THURSDAY, DECEMBER 16, 2010

COMING UP THIS SATURDAY IN EUGENE, OREGON

________________________________________

HERNIA REPORT

Here it is, a week after the operation, and still recovering. Up and on my feet with some help. They didn't tell me beforehand how bad the pain would be afterwards, nor how swoled up my balls and dick would be nor about the bright red color that scared even me, yeah, I know, I shoulda took a pic so everyone could see, but I was too down and out and besides I asked for Percodan for pain and the drugstore would only give me a generic brand which didn't do shit but luckily I had some Oxycodone left over from a back mishap, and I took those until I was in happy happy dreamland for a few days then eased off and lived with the situation, getting a little bit better every day, until yesterday I was good enough or so I thought, to drive into town and visit the doc for a post op checkup and he assured me I was doing fine so I came home and hit the couch and the pain pill for that trip plum wore me out, but I'm not going to let this thing get me down, no it's out into the corn field and chase away those crows who think they own the place since they haven't seen me prowling around peeing in the corners to establish my ownership, they can crow all they want, I still got the persuader, the old twelve guage, you betcha.

________________________________________

SATURDAY, DECEMBER 11, 2010

DOWN AND OUT

I was splitting wood a week or so ago and suddenly had a pain in my right nut so I thought I better get it checked out. First thing the doc said was, "It's not cancer, you're too old for that." He took one look and said, "Hernia."

It was an iguana hernia, a protuberance along the right side of my groin. Got more painful as time went on so I decided to get it taken care of. It's an hermaphodyte. He's Henry when he's a boy. When she nags she's Henrietta. Piece of cake to repair, according to the surgeon. In and out in one day. One long day in hell.

No one said it would hurt so bad for so long afterwards. And try to get real Percodan and not some half ass generic. Oh well, better that than nothing. And it's getting better every day. I got to admit it's getting better. Getting so much better all the time. Take another pill, Ken. Thankee, think I will.

Stay attuned.

--KapnKen

________________________________________

Wednesday, December 1, 2010

Yale-Stanford Basketball

Welcome to the Yale Club of San Francisco

New user, registration is FREE

Yale vs Stanford Men's Basketball

Come cheer on our Bulldogs as the Yale men's basketball team makes a rare West Coast appearance!

The Yale men's basketball team will be making a rare West Coast appearance on Tuesday December 28 to take on the Stanford Cardinals at Maples Pavilion. We are making tickets available at the discounted group price of $18 each (plus online fees) for members of the Yale Alumni Association Clubs of Northern California. Members may take advantage of this opportunity by going to the link below and entering the promotional code "Bulldogs" in the promo code box. Members purchasing tickets with this promo code will receive the discounted price and will be seated in the Yale section. The link to the purchase page is:
http://ev10.evenue.net/cgi-bin/ncommerce3/SEGetEventList?groupCode=B&linkID=stanford&shopperContext=&caller=&appCode=

The Yale Club of San Francisco
Yale Photographs courtesy of Michael Marsland/Yale University
© Copyright Yale Club of San Francisco, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Alumni Development Software

Tuesday, November 30, 2010

Acts 11:19-30 KJV

¹⁹Now they which were scattered abroad upon the persecution that arose about Stephen travelled as far as Phenice, and Cyprus, and Antioch, preaching the word to none but unto the Jews only.

²⁰And some of them were men of Cyprus and Cyrene, which, when they were come to Antioch, spake unto the Grecians, preaching the LORD Jesus.

²¹And the hand of the Lord was with them: and a great number believed, and turned unto the Lord.

²²Then tidings of these things came unto the ears of the church which was in Jerusalem: and they sent forth Barnabas, that he should go as far as Antioch.

²³Who, when he came, and had seen the grace of God, was glad, and exhorted them all, that with purpose of heart they would cleave unto the Lord.

²⁴For he was a good man, and full of the Holy Ghost and of faith: and much people was added unto the Lord.

²⁵Then departed Barnabas to Tarsus, for to seek Saul:

²⁶And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.

²⁷And in these days came prophets from Jerusalem unto Antioch.

²⁸And there stood up one of them named Agabus, and signified by the Spirit that there should be great dearth throughout all the world: which came to pass in the days of Claudius Caesar.

²⁹Then the disciples, every man according to his ability, determined to send relief unto the brethren which dwelt in Judaea:

³⁰Which also they did, and sent it to the elders by the hands of Barnabas and Saul.

Titus 1 KJV

PASSAGE RESULTS:

TITUS 1 (KING JAMES VERSION)

Audio changes

Editor's Picks

How to Study the Bible, Revised Edition

$7.99$5.99

You Save $2 (25%)

Hermeneutics, 2nd edition

$21.99$15.99

You Save $6 (27%)

Dictionary of Ecclesiastical Latin

$29.95$17.99

You Save $11.96 (40%)

See more books at the Bible Gateway store

Titus 1 (King James Version)

Titus 1

¹Paul, a servant of God, and an apostle of Jesus Christ, according to the faith of God's elect, and the acknowledging of the truth which is after godliness;
²In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began;
³But hath in due times manifested his word through preaching, which is committed unto me according to the commandment of God our Saviour;
⁴To Titus, mine own son after the common faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour.
⁵For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee:
⁶If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.
⁷For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre;
⁸But a lover of hospitality, a lover of good men, sober, just, holy, temperate;
⁹Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers.
¹⁰For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision:
¹¹Whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre's sake.
¹²One of themselves, even a prophet of their own, said, the Cretians [Eric: Christians?] are alway liars, evil beasts, slow bellies.
¹³This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith;
¹⁴Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth.
¹⁵Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled.
¹⁶They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate.

King James Version (KJV)Public Domain