Saturday, February 16, 2008

Pete Seeger's soteriology

"My Father's mansion has many rooms,
with room for all his children,
as long as we do share his love,
and see that all are free.
and see that all are free to grow,
and see that all are free to know,
and free to open or to close
the door of their own room."

Pete Seeger, "My Father's Mansion Has Many Rooms", Pete Seeger: Waist Deep in the Big Muddy

Yikes! Who could be saved under such a scheme?! I just heard this song recently. At first it sounds like some kind of everybody-goes-to-heaven scheme. Then there are limits, Then there are big limits, big burdens. Burdens so big I would imagine that any living of "an examined life" would send shudders down one's spine if this were the actual criteria for salvation. Where is the room to fail? Where is room for grace? Where is the final forgiveness of those who didn't even try all those good deeds?

My point is that liberal theologies dreamed up to replace traditional Christian theology often aren't any nicer or compassionate.

Superimposing 3D characters on photos

I was thinking about brushing off my online comic and producing some more images. One thing that I was thinking about was a simpler way to make it. I was reading a book about digital comics and saw a mention of the use of layers. So I rendered a character on a white background, and then pasted it onto a beach scene. I don't think I have found any magic formula yet. The biggest problem was the white or aliased border around the character. I tried rendering with a really large number of pixels, doing a color select, and then shrinking it by one pixel. I'm beginning to wonder if that would eventually save any effort in the long run.

One thing that frustrated the use of povray in making an online comic was that I was spending too much time fiddling with the camera in order to get all the figures into the scene. Still thinking.

Wednesday, February 13, 2008

Complete Spiderman saga in MS Paint.

Pretty cool for such a simple program. (I first found it here).

AMAZING SPIDERMAN ANIMATION! - video powered by Metacafe

Tuesday, February 12, 2008

Who was really in favor of biofuels?

A recent Scientific American headline says,
"Biofuels Are Bad for Feeding People and Combating Climate Change
By displacing agriculture for food—and causing more land clearing—biofuels are bad for hungry people and the environment."
In response, Tony Blankely, former Washington Times editor and popular conservative talking said, said on a KCRW Left, Right, and Center podcast, that
"Scientific American is now my favorite magazine."
I believe that this was in response to the fact that liberal environmentalists could now seem to have egg on their face for advocating something shown by scientists to be counterproductive and unwise. But I ask, were the actual environmentalists actually in favor of biofuels? I did a google search for "biofuels Sierra Club" and found these juicy quotes.

  1. The Oregon chapter of the Sierra Club said,
    "However, we urge caution in promoting corn-based ethanol in Oregon. The production of ethanol from corn can create its own pollution, including carbon monoxide, methanol, toluene, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and volatile organic compounds. Corn is also a very water intensive crop to grow, and a shift to large scale production in the Northwest to meet ethanol demands would put additional pressure on existing water supplies. Further, the widespread use of petroleum based fertilizers for corn production, as well as the petroleum used when shipping corn from other parts of the country, can significantly undermine the value of corn ethanol as an alternative to fossil fuels. We were pleased to see the final version of HB 2210 exlude corn ethanol from production incentives."
  2. A "Smart Energy Summer" page at the Sierra Club says,
    "Biofuels are fuels made from renewable sources such corn, sugarcane, or soy. Because they're made from crops grown right here in America, biofuels are seen by many people as the solution to our energy woes. A little digging, however, reveals that the biofuels of today may not be the best energy source for tomorrow.
    The page contains links to newspaper articles such as, Washington Post: "False Hope: Ethanol Won't Get Us There", and New York Times: "Corn or Soy? How 'bout Neither?"
  3. The Maui, Hawaii chapter of the Sierra Club has a page with many links explaining the reasons
    "Why biofuels are not sustainable and a threat to America's National Security."

Is it really the case that environmentalists have finally been proven wrong, if Scientific American weighs in against biofuels?

Thursday, February 07, 2008

Wednesday, February 06, 2008

God Bless the Republicans!

Open letter to all Republican voters on February 5, 2008:

Thanks for voting for John McCain. I am thankful that you voted for principles and ignored the talking heads on radio who purport to represent conservative values. Consider the values of constitutional government, the rule of law, small government, pay-as-you-go fiscal conservatism, and a high view of the Christian bible. I insist that George W Bush's legacy is an affront to all of these values. The talk show hosts represent a political philosophy that is alien to all of the above. I believe they represent an industry that feeds on conservative people but attempts to steer them towards the interest of a certain class of donors, not actual conservatives. Actual conservatism won tonight.

The Right Screws the Unborn, V

This is my paraphrase from memory of comments Bill Bennett made on CNN on February 5th, 2008:
"These conservative talk show hosts love Joe Lieberman. They bring him on, tell him how much they like him, ask him if he'd like to become a Republican. Now if Lieberman became a Republican, he'd be to the left of McCain. And they hate McCain."
I would note with not much irony that McCain is pro-life and Lieberman is not.