I'm thinking about selling my nice little '96 Honda Civic and using a motorbike for transportation instead. What do you think? Here are the pros and cons I can think of regarding this decision:
PRO
-Chick(s) dig(s) it.
-Better fuel economy.
-I'm hardly ever hauling more than myself when I drive right now.
-Insurance is MUCH cheaper.
CON
-Driving in a safe manner takes more intentionality than a car.
-Hauling any kind of cargo (groceries, etc.) can be tricky (but not impossible).
-Probably won't be able to offer rides anytime soon.
POINTS I DIDN'T MENTION ON PURPOSE
-Riding in bad weather. I already do this on my bicycle and feel the transition to motorbike won't be horribly difficult. This will be my year-round transportation just like my bicycle is.
-Start-up cost of bike and gear. Sale of my car will pretty handily cover this. I'll probably make money on the deal even if I buy really expensive (read "quality") safety gear.
Any I missed? Discuss.
Tuesday, June 28, 2005
Wednesday, June 22, 2005
Where the Skyscrapers are Silos
This is where I live, now. Its all so.....different. On the way down to Enid, OK to spend some time with Katie's sister Samantha I actually mistook a collection of grain elevators and silos for skyscrapers. For some reason, I thought Enid was a little bit on the larger side as far as towns/cities go. When I saw this cluster of buildings jutting out of the landscape my city-fied brain automatically thought, "Ohhh, that must be downtown." I actually fooled myself for about ten seconds as my brain desperately tried to make sense of these rather odd-looking skyscrapers. As soon as I noticed a rounded top on one of the buildings my brain switched gears and the urban landmarks quickly settled into the agrarian outposts they actually were.
This is where I live, in the Great Plains. The wind blows strong and often brings in heavy rains and thunderstorms. Only at school did I see lightning like this, so fierce and spectacular. Nearly every evening the clouds roll in, the weatherman warns to watch out for severe storms. The land is flat, so flat, with nothing to stop the wind. It just blows on through, sometimes barely stopping at all on its way to who knows where.
My recent trip back to Portland made me realize just how much I miss that land. Just stepping off the plan I could smell the difference. The cool, damp, fecund air; you can smell the green in it. On the way up to Mt. St. Helens, following a winding pass up the mountain, vast forests standing guarding the road on either side. These forests were completely destroyed just a few decades ago in the eruption and now they cover the mountainside like a verdant carpet, demonstrating the resiliency of life in this land. It was all so.....green. Its not as if Kansas is void of grass and trees; these things just don't define the land the same way they do back home.
To be able to so easily walk through forests, enjoying the shade of the tall, rough-barked Douglas Firs and the elegant beauty of ferns, this I desire. For now, though, Kansas is the place God has called me and this is the life I have. I make the best of it, trying to enjoy the creation for what it is. I don't know, though, if I will ever be able to get the mountains, trees, and water out of my blood. I think I may be suffering withdrawal symptoms for the rest of my life.
This is where I live, in the Great Plains. The wind blows strong and often brings in heavy rains and thunderstorms. Only at school did I see lightning like this, so fierce and spectacular. Nearly every evening the clouds roll in, the weatherman warns to watch out for severe storms. The land is flat, so flat, with nothing to stop the wind. It just blows on through, sometimes barely stopping at all on its way to who knows where.
My recent trip back to Portland made me realize just how much I miss that land. Just stepping off the plan I could smell the difference. The cool, damp, fecund air; you can smell the green in it. On the way up to Mt. St. Helens, following a winding pass up the mountain, vast forests standing guarding the road on either side. These forests were completely destroyed just a few decades ago in the eruption and now they cover the mountainside like a verdant carpet, demonstrating the resiliency of life in this land. It was all so.....green. Its not as if Kansas is void of grass and trees; these things just don't define the land the same way they do back home.
To be able to so easily walk through forests, enjoying the shade of the tall, rough-barked Douglas Firs and the elegant beauty of ferns, this I desire. For now, though, Kansas is the place God has called me and this is the life I have. I make the best of it, trying to enjoy the creation for what it is. I don't know, though, if I will ever be able to get the mountains, trees, and water out of my blood. I think I may be suffering withdrawal symptoms for the rest of my life.
Friday, June 17, 2005
Getting Off Work Early
There are a number of things I have enjoyed about my job at Cessna as compared to Micron. The biggest difference so far has been the quality of the two managers I've had here at Cessna. These guys have simply been fantastic bosses showing not only respectable engineering prowess but top-notch people skills. I have deeply appreciated the more personable approach from my leadership here; they make work so much more enjoyable and fulfilling.
Case in point: I got off from work early today. One of the planes our group has been working towards FAA certification finally achieved that goal today. As a small reward, we all got part of the afternoon off. Its small things like this that make my managers so great. The loss to the company is pretty small, just a few hours of work on a Friday afternoon. In my mind, though, this mini-holiday is a wonderful treat and an excellent way to show that management appreciates my work. I feel quite blessed.
Case in point: I got off from work early today. One of the planes our group has been working towards FAA certification finally achieved that goal today. As a small reward, we all got part of the afternoon off. Its small things like this that make my managers so great. The loss to the company is pretty small, just a few hours of work on a Friday afternoon. In my mind, though, this mini-holiday is a wonderful treat and an excellent way to show that management appreciates my work. I feel quite blessed.
Tuesday, June 07, 2005
Church and State
Remember what I said about the radio program "This American Life" a few days ago? Well, the show this past weekend (June 4-5, 2005) is well worth listening to particularly if you have a desire to try to be culturally relevant as a Christian. The show is titled "Godless America" and it explores the recent trend of what I'll call "fundamental Christian activism". Over the course of an hour two stories are run; the first dealing with Christian activism in the public forum and the second with one woman's grappling with some of the more unseemly sides of the Bible.
Putting the second half of the show aside (it is told in the vein of a personal story rather than strict journalism, per se), the show does a decent job of looking at both sides of the problem. Put better, this show is very typical of what the program as a whole does quite well. Rather than looking at the big topics of the day from the perspective of the movers and shakers in this world, "This American Life" looks at it from the perspective of the ordinary, everyday person. So rather than examine in detail court decisions regarding the separation of church and state, we hear how one high school biology teacher feels like she was forced by her principal to take an oath confessing the supremacy of the Bible in her life.
If you are of the Christian persuasive and take your faith seriously, this will not be a comfortable show to listen to but I still think it is very worthwhile. Ira Glass does a good job of not caricaturing the Christian faith by calling extreme practices the norm. I don't think there will be any confusion just where he stands on all of this but his bias is actually the best reason to listen to the stories he has assembled. Though I can't say for certain, (especially now that I live in a culture that is highly overtly Bible-Belt-ish), I would be willing to bet that his viewpoint is the viewpoint of many who are on the outside looking in. Ira Glass communicates very clearly how he feels about the growing tide of Christian activism in the public forum and does it in a way that is neither inflammatory nor stoked with rhetoric.
(The second half of the show is a monologue by a woman who, after examining the Bible and realizing just how un-candy-coated some it is, has walked away from the faith. Man, I wish somebody (aside from her unhelpful priest) could have been there to help her understand some of these uncomfortable passages. She raises a lot of good questions about the nature of God as revealed in the Bible but, sadly, doesn't seem to have found any answers. )
For me, the story resurfaced a question that has been dormant in my mind for a while but is one I REALLY need to pull up the frontal parts of my brain again. Putting aside all the rhetoric from both sides about the religious views of the Founding Fathers and the words actually used in the Constitution we are left with the following reality. Our nation was founded on the unique principle that church and state should not be joined at the hip as was commonly the case throughout much of Europe. I'm talking about state governments mandating a religious orientation and taxes going to fund the promotion of a particular religious establishment. Again, setting the details aside, I think this is something that nearly everybody in the good ol' USA thinks is a pretty darn good idea. Religious freedom is something we all value; none of us desires to have other people telling us what is and isn't the right way to believe. We all want the right to decided for ourselves what is an isn't correct without coercion from others.
In the same breath, though, there are many people of many different beliefs that are quite convinced they have THE ANSWER and fit would just be best if all believed the same way. And sometimes, every so often, these people form a majority; this is the politically-active Christian church as it stands today. From a nationwide perspective, on average, Christianity has a slim majority. It may or may not feel like it where you are living now, but let me tell you, down here in the Bible-Belt, its pretty clear.
Given this situation, what's the best course of action for the church? The Constitution will probably prevent a radical transformation of our country into a church-run state but what level of activism is appropriate and beneficial? Are we, the church, doing ourselves any favors by drawing the line where we have drawn it? From a national perspective, there are significant political efforts underway to do everything from get the the Ten Commandments plastered on every public building in existence to making homosexual marriages illegal. What kind of image of Christ do we present by being so active, so militant in pursuing our agenda in the public arena?
Personally, I see both sides of this. The church has a very important role in demonstrating and guiding society (aka people) to Christ and we need to be making a stand and letting our secular culture know that we do not approve of the choices it makes at times. Case in point: homosexuality. The Bible is VERY clear about homosexual practices and, even though it is unpopular and will probably be even more so as time goes on, the church has the responsibility of making it clear how God sees this. Our society needs to know that this is not the direction we need to be heading and that there are some very serious consequences to these choices. The church is in a world of hurt when it abandons this role.
On the other hand, these are just my personal religious beliefs. I know there are a ton of people out there who see differently and cramming my faith into their lives isn't doing either of us any good. They get upset because they feel they are being forced to believe something they don't and I'm upset because they are stubbornly refusing the truth. Is this doing either of us any good? More importantly, from the Christian perspective, have I brought this person any closer to a right relationship with God by my actions? Its hard to imagine how we do any good in with such a militant or forceful approach. It seems to me that we are only hardening the soil while trying to plant.
What to do? Do we pursue the goal of Christianizing the nation or do we verbalize our dissent while no actively hindering the path others have chosen? The only answer I have right now is "yes". As I puzzle over this more and more, I have reached the tentative conclusion that in the public forum, the church cannot forsake its role as a lighthouse to society but also cannot take up the role of steering the endangered boat as well. Christians in government are good but not for the purpose of Christianizing our culture. I think we, the church, could all agree that we don't just want people to act like they have submitted their lives to Christ because thats the accepted, cultural norm, we want them to actually do so. Constantine already tried all of this and it didn't work out so well in the end. As always, people are changed through personal relationships and something a government can never mandate.
That's what I got for now. Again, try to listen to the radio program; its a good thing, trust me.
Putting the second half of the show aside (it is told in the vein of a personal story rather than strict journalism, per se), the show does a decent job of looking at both sides of the problem. Put better, this show is very typical of what the program as a whole does quite well. Rather than looking at the big topics of the day from the perspective of the movers and shakers in this world, "This American Life" looks at it from the perspective of the ordinary, everyday person. So rather than examine in detail court decisions regarding the separation of church and state, we hear how one high school biology teacher feels like she was forced by her principal to take an oath confessing the supremacy of the Bible in her life.
If you are of the Christian persuasive and take your faith seriously, this will not be a comfortable show to listen to but I still think it is very worthwhile. Ira Glass does a good job of not caricaturing the Christian faith by calling extreme practices the norm. I don't think there will be any confusion just where he stands on all of this but his bias is actually the best reason to listen to the stories he has assembled. Though I can't say for certain, (especially now that I live in a culture that is highly overtly Bible-Belt-ish), I would be willing to bet that his viewpoint is the viewpoint of many who are on the outside looking in. Ira Glass communicates very clearly how he feels about the growing tide of Christian activism in the public forum and does it in a way that is neither inflammatory nor stoked with rhetoric.
(The second half of the show is a monologue by a woman who, after examining the Bible and realizing just how un-candy-coated some it is, has walked away from the faith. Man, I wish somebody (aside from her unhelpful priest) could have been there to help her understand some of these uncomfortable passages. She raises a lot of good questions about the nature of God as revealed in the Bible but, sadly, doesn't seem to have found any answers. )
For me, the story resurfaced a question that has been dormant in my mind for a while but is one I REALLY need to pull up the frontal parts of my brain again. Putting aside all the rhetoric from both sides about the religious views of the Founding Fathers and the words actually used in the Constitution we are left with the following reality. Our nation was founded on the unique principle that church and state should not be joined at the hip as was commonly the case throughout much of Europe. I'm talking about state governments mandating a religious orientation and taxes going to fund the promotion of a particular religious establishment. Again, setting the details aside, I think this is something that nearly everybody in the good ol' USA thinks is a pretty darn good idea. Religious freedom is something we all value; none of us desires to have other people telling us what is and isn't the right way to believe. We all want the right to decided for ourselves what is an isn't correct without coercion from others.
In the same breath, though, there are many people of many different beliefs that are quite convinced they have THE ANSWER and fit would just be best if all believed the same way. And sometimes, every so often, these people form a majority; this is the politically-active Christian church as it stands today. From a nationwide perspective, on average, Christianity has a slim majority. It may or may not feel like it where you are living now, but let me tell you, down here in the Bible-Belt, its pretty clear.
Given this situation, what's the best course of action for the church? The Constitution will probably prevent a radical transformation of our country into a church-run state but what level of activism is appropriate and beneficial? Are we, the church, doing ourselves any favors by drawing the line where we have drawn it? From a national perspective, there are significant political efforts underway to do everything from get the the Ten Commandments plastered on every public building in existence to making homosexual marriages illegal. What kind of image of Christ do we present by being so active, so militant in pursuing our agenda in the public arena?
Personally, I see both sides of this. The church has a very important role in demonstrating and guiding society (aka people) to Christ and we need to be making a stand and letting our secular culture know that we do not approve of the choices it makes at times. Case in point: homosexuality. The Bible is VERY clear about homosexual practices and, even though it is unpopular and will probably be even more so as time goes on, the church has the responsibility of making it clear how God sees this. Our society needs to know that this is not the direction we need to be heading and that there are some very serious consequences to these choices. The church is in a world of hurt when it abandons this role.
On the other hand, these are just my personal religious beliefs. I know there are a ton of people out there who see differently and cramming my faith into their lives isn't doing either of us any good. They get upset because they feel they are being forced to believe something they don't and I'm upset because they are stubbornly refusing the truth. Is this doing either of us any good? More importantly, from the Christian perspective, have I brought this person any closer to a right relationship with God by my actions? Its hard to imagine how we do any good in with such a militant or forceful approach. It seems to me that we are only hardening the soil while trying to plant.
What to do? Do we pursue the goal of Christianizing the nation or do we verbalize our dissent while no actively hindering the path others have chosen? The only answer I have right now is "yes". As I puzzle over this more and more, I have reached the tentative conclusion that in the public forum, the church cannot forsake its role as a lighthouse to society but also cannot take up the role of steering the endangered boat as well. Christians in government are good but not for the purpose of Christianizing our culture. I think we, the church, could all agree that we don't just want people to act like they have submitted their lives to Christ because thats the accepted, cultural norm, we want them to actually do so. Constantine already tried all of this and it didn't work out so well in the end. As always, people are changed through personal relationships and something a government can never mandate.
That's what I got for now. Again, try to listen to the radio program; its a good thing, trust me.
Friday, June 03, 2005
Concrete vs Abstract
An interesting idea popped up this last weekend as Katie and I were hiking. Katie asked if I had ever considered visiting Israel for any reason. I should pause before going any further and say that Katie is EXTREMELY interested in all things Jewish. She's taken a trip over to Israel, participated in an outreach ministry here in the US directed towards Jews, and has a nearly constant latent desire to go head over for a long-term stay in Israel. In some sense of the word, she feels "called" to the Jewish people and since I do not share this calling we've talked about this desire she has and how it impacts our dating relationship. In fact, we've talked about it a lot. If I ever feel that things are going too well between us, I bring this up as a topic of conversation so as to muddy the waters between us and keep us both off-balance. It usually works pretty well.
Katie, on the other hand, did not bring this up question about visiting Israel for the reason of creating relational strife. She was simply curious if I had ever wanted to visit Israel for the purpose of better understanding the Bible. I thought about it a second and concluded that I had almost NO desire to visit Israel for this reason. In fact, I had always kind of looked at these spiritual vacations with some disdain or skepticism. I mean, seriously, "walk where Jesus walked"? How is that going to help me understand God or build my faith in any way? What benefit is there in visiting the land of the Bible? It's not like the culture/language/geo-political structure/economics/dirt of Israel today have much of a resemblance to those of any time in the Bible. To me, these trips have always seemed self-indulgent vacations for relatively wealthy Christians in the West.
Katie's response to my answer changed my whole perspective. In a very simple way she showed me what I was missing in all of this (aside from an attitude check). "I'm surprised by your answer but I guess I shouldn't be. You're an abstract person and I'm more concrete."
....
What? Where did that come from?
Slowly, with great deliberation, my brain started to churn on these words. Katie was, I knew, referring to a personality book we had recently finished reading together titled "Please Understand Me" by David Keirsey. Keirsey used the Myers-Briggs (aka MBTI) model to discuss personalities and people. At the beginning of the book he outlines four fundamental personality types defined by the combination of two factors: how we use tools (cooperative vs. utilitarian) and how we use words (abstract vs. concrete). Rather than trying to explain the differences here, let me show you by way of example how the concrete-vs-abstract factor plays in with Katie and I. (No promises I'm going to get this explanation to totally line-up with Keirey's actual personality theory. Have grace on me, Mark M.)
For Katie, because she is a concrete-word person, she uses and understands words in a very, well, concrete way. Maybe "visceral" or "experiential" would be good synonyms here; words have a very definite meaning that is referenced to actual, "real" things she has experienced in some way. When she thinks of "hard" she doesn't think of a concept as much as what "hard" means as a function of experience. She thinks of hard things and how they have impacted her world.
I, though, deal with words in a totally different way, abstractly. I think of the, uhmm, ideas behind the words. I think of words in terms of what they "mean" in an abstract way not so much how the words interact with reality. When I think of "hard" I'm thinking of what it means for something to be "hard", what "hard"-ness can mean in this context, or what other words I associate with "hard". To some extent, abstract-word people live in an ideal word where words are concepts and are used as such.
This difference has come up all the time between Katie and I as we try to communicate; the classic difficulty comes up when we are having a disagreement of some kind. In an attempt to make a point or illustrate more clearly how I see things I'll tacitly start taking in an analogy or metaphor. Early on, this ALWAYS threw Katie (though she's much better at following me now) because I wouldn't clearly state that I was going to speak abstractly. She would, true to her character, start interpreting my analogy/metaphor in very real, experiential, concrete, terms. In short, she was supremely confused as to the sudden change of topic and what it had to do at all with the problem under discussion.
So what does this have to do with visiting Israel? Well, for Katie and all other concrete word-users like her the words in the Bible have concrete connotations. When she reads those words she is trying to understand what is being said in terms of experiences. This means that if real, concrete experiences can be closely associated with the words used in Bible then her level of understanding increases significantly. So for all those concrete-word users (which, if I remember correctly from the book, are the vast majority of the people in the world), visiting the Biblical lands DOES bring greater meaning to the text. In Katie's words, "It helps me be able to have a picture in my mind when I'm reading. I can better understand what the Bible is talking about now that I've been there."
What a revelation this was to me! This changes my perspective completely! In exactly the same way that I could see no benefit to "walking where Jesus walked", there is tremendous benefit for people like Katie. Visiting Israel really was a faith-building venture; to see Jerusalem as it is today and visit the significant sites of the Bible (even though they aren't in many ways what is described in the Bible) provides that concrete-ness to bring the text to life. People like me don't need that experiential basis to feel like we are understanding the text, we are trying to understand the Bible in terms of this network of ideas that we associate with all the words we read. To us, the Bible IS the ideas and the text is a construction of words to communicate those ideas.
So all of this becomes another brick towards a better understanding of Katie. I can promise you, though, that I'm going to be re-learning and more fully learning it for a while. Thankfully Katie is very patient with me; I need that to understand crazy concrete-word users like her. (Seriously, words as experiences? How crazy is that?)
Katie, on the other hand, did not bring this up question about visiting Israel for the reason of creating relational strife. She was simply curious if I had ever wanted to visit Israel for the purpose of better understanding the Bible. I thought about it a second and concluded that I had almost NO desire to visit Israel for this reason. In fact, I had always kind of looked at these spiritual vacations with some disdain or skepticism. I mean, seriously, "walk where Jesus walked"? How is that going to help me understand God or build my faith in any way? What benefit is there in visiting the land of the Bible? It's not like the culture/language/geo-political structure/economics/dirt of Israel today have much of a resemblance to those of any time in the Bible. To me, these trips have always seemed self-indulgent vacations for relatively wealthy Christians in the West.
Katie's response to my answer changed my whole perspective. In a very simple way she showed me what I was missing in all of this (aside from an attitude check). "I'm surprised by your answer but I guess I shouldn't be. You're an abstract person and I'm more concrete."
....
What? Where did that come from?
Slowly, with great deliberation, my brain started to churn on these words. Katie was, I knew, referring to a personality book we had recently finished reading together titled "Please Understand Me" by David Keirsey. Keirsey used the Myers-Briggs (aka MBTI) model to discuss personalities and people. At the beginning of the book he outlines four fundamental personality types defined by the combination of two factors: how we use tools (cooperative vs. utilitarian) and how we use words (abstract vs. concrete). Rather than trying to explain the differences here, let me show you by way of example how the concrete-vs-abstract factor plays in with Katie and I. (No promises I'm going to get this explanation to totally line-up with Keirey's actual personality theory. Have grace on me, Mark M.)
For Katie, because she is a concrete-word person, she uses and understands words in a very, well, concrete way. Maybe "visceral" or "experiential" would be good synonyms here; words have a very definite meaning that is referenced to actual, "real" things she has experienced in some way. When she thinks of "hard" she doesn't think of a concept as much as what "hard" means as a function of experience. She thinks of hard things and how they have impacted her world.
I, though, deal with words in a totally different way, abstractly. I think of the, uhmm, ideas behind the words. I think of words in terms of what they "mean" in an abstract way not so much how the words interact with reality. When I think of "hard" I'm thinking of what it means for something to be "hard", what "hard"-ness can mean in this context, or what other words I associate with "hard". To some extent, abstract-word people live in an ideal word where words are concepts and are used as such.
This difference has come up all the time between Katie and I as we try to communicate; the classic difficulty comes up when we are having a disagreement of some kind. In an attempt to make a point or illustrate more clearly how I see things I'll tacitly start taking in an analogy or metaphor. Early on, this ALWAYS threw Katie (though she's much better at following me now) because I wouldn't clearly state that I was going to speak abstractly. She would, true to her character, start interpreting my analogy/metaphor in very real, experiential, concrete, terms. In short, she was supremely confused as to the sudden change of topic and what it had to do at all with the problem under discussion.
So what does this have to do with visiting Israel? Well, for Katie and all other concrete word-users like her the words in the Bible have concrete connotations. When she reads those words she is trying to understand what is being said in terms of experiences. This means that if real, concrete experiences can be closely associated with the words used in Bible then her level of understanding increases significantly. So for all those concrete-word users (which, if I remember correctly from the book, are the vast majority of the people in the world), visiting the Biblical lands DOES bring greater meaning to the text. In Katie's words, "It helps me be able to have a picture in my mind when I'm reading. I can better understand what the Bible is talking about now that I've been there."
What a revelation this was to me! This changes my perspective completely! In exactly the same way that I could see no benefit to "walking where Jesus walked", there is tremendous benefit for people like Katie. Visiting Israel really was a faith-building venture; to see Jerusalem as it is today and visit the significant sites of the Bible (even though they aren't in many ways what is described in the Bible) provides that concrete-ness to bring the text to life. People like me don't need that experiential basis to feel like we are understanding the text, we are trying to understand the Bible in terms of this network of ideas that we associate with all the words we read. To us, the Bible IS the ideas and the text is a construction of words to communicate those ideas.
So all of this becomes another brick towards a better understanding of Katie. I can promise you, though, that I'm going to be re-learning and more fully learning it for a while. Thankfully Katie is very patient with me; I need that to understand crazy concrete-word users like her. (Seriously, words as experiences? How crazy is that?)
Tuesday, May 31, 2005
Hutchinson, KS?
That's right, boys and girls. It may be hard to believe, but Hutchinson, KS is home of one of the most amazing collections of early rocketry and space flight artifacts outside of the Smithsonian. I'm referring to the one and only Cosmosphere which Katie and I just took a trip to see on this fine Memorial Day. This is a town of 41,000 people about an hour's drive due NW of Wichita and not the type of place you would expect such a collection to reside. The museum proper isn't all that large physically but I would guess that it would take over four hours to go through and just read all the placards. Not only are there explanations for the artifacts but the museum also provides a very good history of early rocketry and space-craft itself.
And the artifacts, well, this is nothing to sneeze at. To name a few of the more impressive items, the museum is currently the custodian of:
-One each of the V-1 and V-2 rockets developed by Germany in WWII.
-What are effectively serial numbers two for both Sputnik I and Sputnik II (These are the satellites that would have been sent to space if the originals didn't make it.)
-A space suit used by one of the astronauts on Apollo 13.
-The engineering development unit of the lunar module used in the Apollo missions (one of the few left in the world as most are sitting on the moon right now).
-The actual, honest-to-goodness Apollo 13 command module in which the astronauts managed to survive their treacherous voyage.
-A fully-assembled but decommissioned SR-71 Blackbird.
Like I said, these are just the highlights. There are a ton of smaller items from the early days of rocketry which are simply truly amazing to see in-person. There is also an OMNImax theater and planetarium to round out the outer-space experience. Katie and I were more than occupied from 10am to 4pm and we didn't quite get to see it all.
I would have never thought in my entire life I would be able to do something like touch an SR-71 Blackbird with my hands or see any actual Apollo command module but, well, I've done both now. So if you're ever in the area and have a little bit of a space-bug in you, I would heartily recommend you stop in and spend the time exploring the museum. I think it will be worth your while.
Who would have though such wonders would be found in Hutchinson, KS?
And the artifacts, well, this is nothing to sneeze at. To name a few of the more impressive items, the museum is currently the custodian of:
-One each of the V-1 and V-2 rockets developed by Germany in WWII.
-What are effectively serial numbers two for both Sputnik I and Sputnik II (These are the satellites that would have been sent to space if the originals didn't make it.)
-A space suit used by one of the astronauts on Apollo 13.
-The engineering development unit of the lunar module used in the Apollo missions (one of the few left in the world as most are sitting on the moon right now).
-The actual, honest-to-goodness Apollo 13 command module in which the astronauts managed to survive their treacherous voyage.
-A fully-assembled but decommissioned SR-71 Blackbird.
Like I said, these are just the highlights. There are a ton of smaller items from the early days of rocketry which are simply truly amazing to see in-person. There is also an OMNImax theater and planetarium to round out the outer-space experience. Katie and I were more than occupied from 10am to 4pm and we didn't quite get to see it all.
I would have never thought in my entire life I would be able to do something like touch an SR-71 Blackbird with my hands or see any actual Apollo command module but, well, I've done both now. So if you're ever in the area and have a little bit of a space-bug in you, I would heartily recommend you stop in and spend the time exploring the museum. I think it will be worth your while.
Who would have though such wonders would be found in Hutchinson, KS?
Monday, May 30, 2005
The Best Radio Program Ever
Right now I'm listening to a recording of one of the most unique radio programs that is nationally syndicated, This American Life. NPR does the distribution and if you've got a chance, I recommend tuning in. I have found, after listening for a year or two on a pretty consistent basis (now even more consistent due to the wonders of TiVo for radio, the radioShark) that this is a winner of a show. Probably not something to schedule your life around, but during that hour broadcast you can pretty much count on something you have never thought about popping across the airwaves. If you're a fan of new ideas and interesting things to mull over in your mind, this is a fertile feeding ground. Airing every weekend on a public radio station near you.
Saturday, May 28, 2005
Hiking and Ticks
Just back from a hike at the Konza Prairie with my wonderful girlfriend. Katie was very patient with me today as I forced us to stop many times to take pictures of the scenery. You know, for Kansas, this is a very nice hike. Lots of trees, big spaces, the Flint Hills to roam around in; just what my Pacific NW upbringing needs after four months on the prairie.
Something I never dealt with back where I grew up, though, were ticks. I was in the Boy Scouts during my middle and high school years and we talked of ticks often. In fact, one of the hottest Boy Scout debates (at least in our troop) was the best way to deal with ticks. The common cures ranged from the much maligned gentle tweezer pull (But if their heads break off, it'll get infected!) to the hot burnt-out match to using vegetable oil at the bite location to suffocate them. Though the debates were fierce at times the vegetable oil trick seemed to usually win out in the end as it seemed the least invasive. The funny part about all of this is the fact that NONE of us had EVER seen a tick in person. It may have been the weather forcing us into long-pants for most of our camping trips or maybe there just aren't as many ticks up there; it doesn't matter, we were all blithely ignorant.
As of today, I have now passed this adolescent stage and have begun my adult life when it comes to ticks.
Being male and not having the social pressure to shave my legs, I tend to let the hair on my legs grow out. From what I've noticed, this is common among most men (exceptions that come to mind are hard-core bicycle racers and swimmers). Well, today that came back to bite me, literally, thanks to wearing shorts on this approximately twelve mile hike through the prairie.
On our way back to Wichita, I noticed a small insect that looked like a proportionally-challenged spider crawling around on my legs. I let it crawl onto my finger and then tried to kill it by squishing it against the dashboard of my car. Well, things didn't work out so well and the little guy ended up in Katie's seat. Note to self: Katie is not a big fan of insects. She ID-ed the guy as a tick when it landed in her lap but wasn't able to finish what I started due to her somewhat excited state. He escaped somewhere on her side of the car and I volunteered to take the next exit so we could hunt him down.
We never found him but decided it would be a good idea to look ourselves over to make sure we were clean. (This was probably the first time in my life I was verbally encouraged to intently study a woman's legs.) Katie was tick free but, I, on the other hand was not. We found two of those guys buried in my legs. TWO.
The Boy Scout training evaporated from my brain; I wanted those little buggers out now! Let me tell you, if you've ever tried pulling a tick off a non-smooth surface, you know how hard it can be. It took me a few minutes to finally wrest one of them from my thigh; Katie got the other one in just a few seconds. As I found out, though, the only thing harder than getting the tick out is killing it. Without any of my blood in them, ticks are very thin and flat and even trying to crush this one between my thumb and index finger did not succeed in killing it. I tried this on a fourth tick I found while driving home; he made the same mistake the first one did and just crawled onto my finger looking for blood. I didn't look back and simply mashed him against my thumb for fifteen seconds before flicking him onto the dash (and not onto Katie's lap). He was still moving around, trying to get off his back! How do they do that? Again, Katie came to the rescue by picking him up with a tissue and throwing him out the window.
I'm about to go take a shower and give my whole body one more check but before I go, let me say this: probably the most unique experience in all of this adventure is looking down at my leg and seeing those guys with their (very) small heads buried in my skin. Its a very, uhmm, unusual sight. Just sitting there, legs spread out for balance, (empty) flat abdomen laying flush against me. With just a glance you could see that this thing was very foreign to my body, not a part of me. It made me want to yell and say "Hey, who said you could help yourself to that? That's my blood!"
POST-SHOWER UPDATE:
No embedded parasites ID-ed, one free-loader on the elastic leg-band of my underwear. (just a wee too bit close for comfort.) Attempted to neutralize with tweezers. Crippled but was not able to easily terminate (How do they do that?!) Total tick count for the day: five, all mine. Next time, I'm shaving my legs are wearing pants.
Something I never dealt with back where I grew up, though, were ticks. I was in the Boy Scouts during my middle and high school years and we talked of ticks often. In fact, one of the hottest Boy Scout debates (at least in our troop) was the best way to deal with ticks. The common cures ranged from the much maligned gentle tweezer pull (But if their heads break off, it'll get infected!) to the hot burnt-out match to using vegetable oil at the bite location to suffocate them. Though the debates were fierce at times the vegetable oil trick seemed to usually win out in the end as it seemed the least invasive. The funny part about all of this is the fact that NONE of us had EVER seen a tick in person. It may have been the weather forcing us into long-pants for most of our camping trips or maybe there just aren't as many ticks up there; it doesn't matter, we were all blithely ignorant.
As of today, I have now passed this adolescent stage and have begun my adult life when it comes to ticks.
Being male and not having the social pressure to shave my legs, I tend to let the hair on my legs grow out. From what I've noticed, this is common among most men (exceptions that come to mind are hard-core bicycle racers and swimmers). Well, today that came back to bite me, literally, thanks to wearing shorts on this approximately twelve mile hike through the prairie.
On our way back to Wichita, I noticed a small insect that looked like a proportionally-challenged spider crawling around on my legs. I let it crawl onto my finger and then tried to kill it by squishing it against the dashboard of my car. Well, things didn't work out so well and the little guy ended up in Katie's seat. Note to self: Katie is not a big fan of insects. She ID-ed the guy as a tick when it landed in her lap but wasn't able to finish what I started due to her somewhat excited state. He escaped somewhere on her side of the car and I volunteered to take the next exit so we could hunt him down.
We never found him but decided it would be a good idea to look ourselves over to make sure we were clean. (This was probably the first time in my life I was verbally encouraged to intently study a woman's legs.) Katie was tick free but, I, on the other hand was not. We found two of those guys buried in my legs. TWO.
The Boy Scout training evaporated from my brain; I wanted those little buggers out now! Let me tell you, if you've ever tried pulling a tick off a non-smooth surface, you know how hard it can be. It took me a few minutes to finally wrest one of them from my thigh; Katie got the other one in just a few seconds. As I found out, though, the only thing harder than getting the tick out is killing it. Without any of my blood in them, ticks are very thin and flat and even trying to crush this one between my thumb and index finger did not succeed in killing it. I tried this on a fourth tick I found while driving home; he made the same mistake the first one did and just crawled onto my finger looking for blood. I didn't look back and simply mashed him against my thumb for fifteen seconds before flicking him onto the dash (and not onto Katie's lap). He was still moving around, trying to get off his back! How do they do that? Again, Katie came to the rescue by picking him up with a tissue and throwing him out the window.
I'm about to go take a shower and give my whole body one more check but before I go, let me say this: probably the most unique experience in all of this adventure is looking down at my leg and seeing those guys with their (very) small heads buried in my skin. Its a very, uhmm, unusual sight. Just sitting there, legs spread out for balance, (empty) flat abdomen laying flush against me. With just a glance you could see that this thing was very foreign to my body, not a part of me. It made me want to yell and say "Hey, who said you could help yourself to that? That's my blood!"
POST-SHOWER UPDATE:
No embedded parasites ID-ed, one free-loader on the elastic leg-band of my underwear. (just a wee too bit close for comfort.) Attempted to neutralize with tweezers. Crippled but was not able to easily terminate (How do they do that?!) Total tick count for the day: five, all mine. Next time, I'm shaving my legs are wearing pants.
Thursday, May 26, 2005
Move to Wichita
As many of you probably know, about four months ago I made a big change in my life and moved to Wichita, KS from Boise, ID. The change was prompted by year-and-a-half, long-distance romance with a fine young lady living down here in Wichita. We both desired to advance the relationship to a point where plane rides were not required to see each other; we're kind of weird like that. Both of us had been working on getting jobs for a while (she in Boise, I in Wichita) but I was the one that landed an interview around Thanksgiving 2004. When a job offer materialized, the choice was clear to me and I took the it without much second-guessing. Katie and I had been working towards this goal for so long and now the end was in sight.
Moves are hard for me, though. My move to Boise straight out of college was much more difficult than I had expected and I ended up with a significant but not frequently crippling case of depression (self- and peer-diagnosed). Being more introverted, it takes a lot of time and energy to form new relationships, making moves (and sometimes changes in general) large emotional burdens. I guessed that moving to Wichita would probably not be as difficult as the move to Boise but I had no hopes of it being a natural adjustment. I figured that having one key relationship already in place and being more aware of how I struggle in moves would make this one easier than the last but far from a cake-walk.
I was right.
The toughest part of this transition, though, came in realizing just how much I had given up to make this move. Or, more specifically, how much I had worked to form relationships in Boise that were just now coming to fruition. I had been putting diligent effort for quite a while into find ing my place in Boise and after years (literally) of struggling with it, I finally felt like I was making some progress. In short, I felt I had been making some long-term investments and they were just now paying off. To be specific:
Teaching the 11th grade Sunday school class at church. Just a few months before I left an opportunity had been presented for me to start teaching the 11th graders. This was great in so many ways: I got to take part in the teacher training which was, far and away, the best small group of which I have ever been a part. I knew all the 11th graders pretty well and they are a fun group to be around. I had an opportunity to use a somewhat latent skill I have always wanted to develop. All around, this was a very good thing.
The Triumvirate was just forming. By this I mean some of the coolest and most unique social activities with two people I greatly respect: Ken and Caroline. These two and been interning at church for the past several summers but due to their busy schedules during those times, we hadn't had much time to hang out together. Almost by accident, we started spending time together on a weekly basis and it turned out to be one of the highlights of my week. We three thought in a pretty similar way and enjoyed many of the same things. We were all at the same stage in life, still trying to figure out where we were headed. Both, I miss those two.
New group at church. Two very cool people, Mark and Jenny, were just back from China and, using their exceptional people skills, were in the midst of forming a group of younger single people. The church (in the most general sense of the word) seems to have a hard time knowing what to do with single people. This makes a lot of sense; it is a family-oriented institution and people without families don't easily fit into its structure. I had made feeble attempts to get a group going to deal with this problem. Let's just say that Mark and Jenny were able to succeed where I couldn't. All-around high-fives to them, too bad I was literally on my way out the door as it was happening.
African ministry partner. Continuing on the list of gifted and all around great people I had been spending time with, Kelly and I had been working for a number of months to find a ministry in Africa with which to partner. (Truth be told, Kelly was doing most of the work and I was doing my best to provide feedback and keep her encouraged in the endeavor). We found one and just a few weeks before I hopped in my car to drive to Wichita, the founder of the ministry visited our church to further explore this opportunity. Well, as of the time of this writing, things are looking very promising. Kelly has arranged a large number of child sponsorships and already spent a month over in Rwanda (where the ministry is based). My heart for social justice and a desire to make Christ known in practical ways could not have found a better outlet.
I don't list these all so as to solicit pity from others. I list these to make a point: my move was either one of those grand bits of Divine Timing or I have made a very big mistake. I'm not exaggerating when I say that all of these things had come together just in the past few months prior to my departure. This is when God provides the job and the opportunity to be with Katie. For a long time, Sunday mornings here in Wichita were pretty depressing. I would go to this new church and sit around all these new people and all I wanted was to be in a comfortable environment again, one where I knew others and was known. This I had finally achieved back in Boise but Boise was no longer my home.
I choose to believe that God knew what he was doing when he provided this job for me in Wichita. Though I long to be back in Boise, this is where my life is now.
Moves are hard for me, though. My move to Boise straight out of college was much more difficult than I had expected and I ended up with a significant but not frequently crippling case of depression (self- and peer-diagnosed). Being more introverted, it takes a lot of time and energy to form new relationships, making moves (and sometimes changes in general) large emotional burdens. I guessed that moving to Wichita would probably not be as difficult as the move to Boise but I had no hopes of it being a natural adjustment. I figured that having one key relationship already in place and being more aware of how I struggle in moves would make this one easier than the last but far from a cake-walk.
I was right.
The toughest part of this transition, though, came in realizing just how much I had given up to make this move. Or, more specifically, how much I had worked to form relationships in Boise that were just now coming to fruition. I had been putting diligent effort for quite a while into find ing my place in Boise and after years (literally) of struggling with it, I finally felt like I was making some progress. In short, I felt I had been making some long-term investments and they were just now paying off. To be specific:
Teaching the 11th grade Sunday school class at church. Just a few months before I left an opportunity had been presented for me to start teaching the 11th graders. This was great in so many ways: I got to take part in the teacher training which was, far and away, the best small group of which I have ever been a part. I knew all the 11th graders pretty well and they are a fun group to be around. I had an opportunity to use a somewhat latent skill I have always wanted to develop. All around, this was a very good thing.
The Triumvirate was just forming. By this I mean some of the coolest and most unique social activities with two people I greatly respect: Ken and Caroline. These two and been interning at church for the past several summers but due to their busy schedules during those times, we hadn't had much time to hang out together. Almost by accident, we started spending time together on a weekly basis and it turned out to be one of the highlights of my week. We three thought in a pretty similar way and enjoyed many of the same things. We were all at the same stage in life, still trying to figure out where we were headed. Both, I miss those two.
New group at church. Two very cool people, Mark and Jenny, were just back from China and, using their exceptional people skills, were in the midst of forming a group of younger single people. The church (in the most general sense of the word) seems to have a hard time knowing what to do with single people. This makes a lot of sense; it is a family-oriented institution and people without families don't easily fit into its structure. I had made feeble attempts to get a group going to deal with this problem. Let's just say that Mark and Jenny were able to succeed where I couldn't. All-around high-fives to them, too bad I was literally on my way out the door as it was happening.
African ministry partner. Continuing on the list of gifted and all around great people I had been spending time with, Kelly and I had been working for a number of months to find a ministry in Africa with which to partner. (Truth be told, Kelly was doing most of the work and I was doing my best to provide feedback and keep her encouraged in the endeavor). We found one and just a few weeks before I hopped in my car to drive to Wichita, the founder of the ministry visited our church to further explore this opportunity. Well, as of the time of this writing, things are looking very promising. Kelly has arranged a large number of child sponsorships and already spent a month over in Rwanda (where the ministry is based). My heart for social justice and a desire to make Christ known in practical ways could not have found a better outlet.
I don't list these all so as to solicit pity from others. I list these to make a point: my move was either one of those grand bits of Divine Timing or I have made a very big mistake. I'm not exaggerating when I say that all of these things had come together just in the past few months prior to my departure. This is when God provides the job and the opportunity to be with Katie. For a long time, Sunday mornings here in Wichita were pretty depressing. I would go to this new church and sit around all these new people and all I wanted was to be in a comfortable environment again, one where I knew others and was known. This I had finally achieved back in Boise but Boise was no longer my home.
I choose to believe that God knew what he was doing when he provided this job for me in Wichita. Though I long to be back in Boise, this is where my life is now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)