Bishop T.D. Jakes on Rev. Wright

I usually do not follow the writings of Christian speaker Bishop T. D. Jakes. I only know that when flipping through the channels on TV, I've occasionally seen him on TBN. This is the network that features Jan and Paul Crouch, a network that has "street cred" with a certain segment of the evangelical or Neopentecostal Christian community in the United States. I remember this network devoting significant air time to the Terry Schiavo case and in 2004 warning us of the dangers of allowing John Kerry to pick Supreme Court Justices.

So what would this preacher, an African American who's no "Ted Kennedy," have to say about the media attention to Rev. Wright?

Commentary: Negative press distracts churches from mission

The Potter's House, though largely African-American, is composed of 20 different nationalities and growing in diversity. It is designed much the same way Sen. Barack Obama has built his campaign: on a strong commitment to reconciliation, the admonition for unity and strong desire for the continuation of diversity instead of exclusion.

While I have not endorsed any candidate, who can ignore the hunger of Americans for change? No matter who your political choice may be, it is hard to remain ambivalent to the tone that Obama sounded, igniting a national response from people of all walks of life, crowding into stadiums openly weeping -- like they were in church -- at the very idea of a nation that reflects the best of our ideals; not the divisive ranting and bickering that may drive up ratings but threaten the cannibalization of our dreams and the demolition of our hopes.

Why conservatism in America is essentially a spiritual problem

"... inherently good people ..."

-- Sean Hannity, 05/06/08.

These words were spoken by Sean Hannity today as a rebuttal to something in Rev. Wright's complaints about America. That America was basically full of "inherently good people." Any Christian can see that if we were all inherently good people, that we wouldn't need a savior, there was no need for a cross.

Left behind, another cartoon

I found this at GodTube. I don't know exactly where it comes from, but it is highly reminiscent of the "Left Behind" phenomenon. I am not a fan of that series of books. I think the focus can be inherently selfish-- what do I gotta do to make sure I get in? Rather than being a focus on what Christ did for us. This preaching seems to present viewers with a primary problem of damnation, and then leave them in shock wondering what they need to go to solve it, the answer being their work of believing. After saying we're at risk of damnation for sin, too many of this type of preacher get upset when folks start criticizing the President. I think the better mode of preaching is to present viewers with the primary problem of sin, and then point to the cross as the ultimate solution.


I also don't think that the geo-politics of the books have anything at all to do with actual biblical Christianity. The Left Behind politics seem to be more about "What nominal Christians might do if they sought to establish a kingdom on earth and kill all their enemies with jet fighters."

That being said, this is one really cool cartoon. There will be gnashing of teeth on that day.

Google Maps get a NY City tourist lost!

How many of you non-NYC residents know where York Avenue is? Do you know every single instance of when a street in NYC is not a number? I sure don't, that's why I wanted to rely on an internet map product like the street view feature in Google Maps.

I searched for the Helmsley Medical Tower. Google Maps gave me a picture of it, and even showed me where it was relative to the numbered streets in the city. So I started to make my way to the place clearly indicated on the map, around 57th. When I got there, I was just going to walk around the block looking for a building whose appearance matched the image in the photo. Turns out the Helmsley Medical Tower is closer to 71st.

The problem is that Google Maps put that silly little person icon on the map, in a place which has NOTHING to do with the location of my destination. It's distracting, it led me to believe that this was where I was headed. Would you have made the same mistake?

Late Cretaceous Earth

I thought that the detail on these images of the prehistoric Earth was pretty cool and they triggered the imagination.
From Global Paleogeographic Views of Earth History - Late Precambrian to Recent by Ron Blakey at Northern Arizona University.

Amazing driving feats!

View more awesome pictures at fukung.net

Lutheran Earth-Day Message

It's pointed out as being an interfaith message. Does the fact that it "had to" be an interfaith message enhance or detract from its credibility? If it's purely an interfaith message, I'd prefer he take his collar off while saying it. I wouldn't go to a Lutheran pastor to find a message if I wanted an interfaith one. If the message only finds credibility when condensed or excised to an interfaith content, I guess I"m not as interested in it.

Mythbusters: can you blow your eyes out by sneezing?

Not for the faint of heart.
(Just kidding, nothing happens!!)
See at: www.neatorama.com

Blender 2.45: Rigidity vs. E.Stiff

I was wondering what were the best softbody physics settings for making a bouncing ball in Blender 2.45. I was very surprised that there was a sweet spot in the middle here. I am wondering if the use of an icosphere--which has triangles-- made for a very different experience. I may do this again with an object made with quads. Sorry if this is boringly slow-- I'll fix that in another version, too.

The politics behind "Can Science Save the Banana?"

In this episode of the Scientific American podcast, a botanist talks about the science and history of bananas. One interesting political observation struck me during the talk. The guy was talking about how plant diseases have made growing bananas difficult. When a fungus infestation would break out in a plantation, the best approach was to just up and move to a new location. The author said, that this required lots of free land. He also said it required slave labor. Slave labor and free land. In order to get both of those, you had to buy a government. He said that's basically why in the 20th century they called some of these countries "banana republics."

Again, the idea of "free land and slave labor" for companies struck me. I remember doing a lot of reading about the political controversies in Latin America in the 1980's. Those who were "conservative" on the issues seemed to be on the side of the banana companies and the governments. That supporting the governments was ultimately a support of private property rights, "classical liberalism", "free markets", freedom, liberty, etc. Granted, you probably didn't want the rebels to actually take over, but the struggle against the plantations I feel was unfairly painted as being merely a campaign against freedom. "Slave labor and free land" don't sound like things Adam Smith was in favor of. I wonder, in contrast, to what extent if the plantations were not violating all sorts of principles of liberty, we wouldn't have had all those problems.