I was sobered and appalled Sunday evening as I drove home from my feel-good training weekend as this NPR story played.

It is about a “patch” of the ocean filled with TRASH, 80% of which is plastic land waste.  (Best Life Magazine has a pretty in-depth article about the situation, in addition to the NPR story.)

And my first thought as I got upset was, “Why the hell didn’t I know about this before?” 

Why doesn’t EVERYONE know about this?

Which means, I’m going to tell you so that you can spread the word.  If this isn’t proof that something needs to change (which will be the next post on this topic), then what is?

     

The Facts:

• Refuse, both marine (20%) and land-based (80%), is collected in the pacific ocean between Hawaii and the West Coast by ocean currents.
• The Eastern Pacific Garbage Patch is nearly the size of two states of Texas.  TWO.  It is, in essence, a loose floating continent.
• It isn’t the only Garbage Patch in the Pacific
• Plastic doesn’t degrade.  It merely breaks into small bits (called “nurdles”) and is ingested or becomes a home for microorganisms, some of them harmful. 
• Some of this trash comes from ships that illegally jettison trash of corporations (botched shoe batches, plastic bags, etc).
• Accidental “dumps” of goods by ships are not required to be cleaned up or even reported.
• Wildlife eat the plastic items, thinking they are food.  Seabirds often ingest the plastic items, and then regurgitate it (or try to) for their chicks!  Other wildlife are caught in the plastic and die, or it becomes a permanent part of their lives.
• Japanese researchers found that “plastic debris can act like a sponge for toxic chemicals, soaking up a millionfold greater concentration of such deadly compounds as pcbs and dde, a breakdown product of the notorious insecticide ddt, than the surrounding seawater.” (from mindfully.org)
• Charles Moore is one of the few trying to make a difference in this situation.  This is a write up by him.

This doesn’t include the information we are continually learning about plastics and how harmful they are to us.  The chemicals involved with plastics have been linked to the obesity epidemic, as well as being found as carcinogens (remember my post about microwave popcorn?)

Part of the problem is no one group will claim responsibility for the problems - because it is everyone’s problem.  The US Government has taken some actions in working towards this, but it has been poorly funded and slow going.

The next post on this?  Continent of Trash - the 911.

Links for more information:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/10/19/SS6JS8RH0.DTL

http://www.algalita.org/newsletters.html

http://www.mindfully.org/Plastic/Ocean/Trashing-Oceans-Plastic4nov02.htm

http://www.mindfully.org/Plastic/Ocean/Pacific-Garbage-Patch27oct02.htm

http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/CrisesArticle.aspx?storyId=N05174536

http://marine-litter.gpa.unep.org/documents/World’s_largest_landfill.pdf

http://www.naturalhistorymag.com/master.html?http://www.naturalhistorymag.com/1103/1103_feature.html

http://www.bestlifeonline.com/cms/publish/health-fitness/Our_oceans_are_turning_into_plastic_are_we_2.shtml

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/pacificnw04232006/coverstory.html

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2007/10/19/SS6JS8RH0.DTL&type=politics

http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/1011/p02s01-usgn.html

2 comments

I would never assume that LifeHacker was reading MY blog , but I certainly read theirs.  And today, I see that they have touched on the fear of mixing Mac and PC in your household (which I discuss in my blog post about Mac Vs PC), and provide ways to make it work for a harmonious household.  Bravo! 

But is it just the beginning of the sibling rivalry? 

 

1 comment

Neopoleon.  Favorite post so far?  “The Smartest Man in the World is …Me!”

http://www.neopoleon.com/home/

And the HR post is pretty funny too - the comics make me laugh my butt off. 

Yes, I admit to the fact that I found this blog when looking for comics about Mac vs. PC.  My evil pursuits of continuing a dead conversation lead me to such riches, though, that I might continue to look!

1 comment

Yesterday, I read this great blogpost from The Wild Green Yonder about the differences between environmental movements in terms of shades of green.  K-Co, you’ll be happy to see that you were spot on. 

Their shades are reposted below.

It’s very obvious that our world has issues with the environment that need to be dealt with.  The growing problem has created these different greens that are each looking at the issues from different perspectives.  Everyday more facts indicate that our world is sick with the damage that has been done to it, with the green community hotly debating which level of illness we are dealing with (Some Peak Oil proponents might, for example, state that our situation is terminal and it will take a virtual miracle to survive.)  Wild Green Yonder makes it pretty obvious where they feel we should be heading, as if the greens are three levels of environmental enlightenment. 

However, I’m not so sure that it is so bad to have these three different shades/perspectives in existence together, instead of having to shed one to move onto another.  And no, it isn’t my love of Lime Green as a color that makes me cling to it so. 

Certainly for the present they are a welcome change from the past.  There was a time when every person who cared about the environment was viewed as what I could deem the shade of  Olive Green -  the color of hippies, eco-terrorists and tree-huggers, cargo pants and worn out fatigues, good for all those earthy types, but not something the general public should be concerned about.  It symbolized resale shops, composting and marijuana - and really gave the impression that these people were out of touch with society, relegating environmental issues to the backburner.

I’m just very glad that we’ve moved beyond this into a spread that reaches more people.  Lime Green still espouses consumerism, which still has its negatives to the environment, and many environmentalists are very skeptical and deroggatory about Lime Green’s achievements and methods.

But Lime Green is getting people to embrace the idea that environmentalism is accessible…and desirable.  I think Lime Green is the ground floor that most people climb from to get to Grass or Forest Green levels.  So we need Lime Green to be the turning point, the launch pad for expansion into the other realms.  It wasn’t until I started trying to be more ecologically conscious in what I purchased (aka, Lime Green) that I started to really recognize the deeper aspects of ecology (Grass Green).  It is almost as if Lime Green is the first level at which you can see the other greens in the horizon. Once you’ve reached Lime Green, Grass and Forest Green seem actually attainable for oneself, instead of being the realm of the Olive Greens.

At least in American culture, if you create a holier-than-thou atmosphere, you’ll never get buy-in.  And buy-in (a telling term at that) is what we need from the American people to support green initiatives.

So Lime Green is an integral step towards building the ecological perspective.  Lime Green is Whole Foods, Co-Ops and local farmer’s markets, Hugger Mugger, Gaiam, Real Goods - companies that have feet in both the Lime Green and the Grass Green worlds to offer sustainable options to both - and facilitate the movement of Lime Green perspective into Grass Green perspective.  Consider that these companies are often the only way the public is even made aware of many current issues.  Many people read about an eco-friendly widget and learn about the issues behind the non-eco-friendly one - for the first time, the message about an issue is getting through.  Lime Green is, therefore, also an educational stage that preps for the other stages.

I also feel that not all of society will ever move totally to one color, and that there will be standards of living that still require Lime Green responses, highlights among the darker, richer colors of Grass and Forest that make up our worlds.  In the end, perhaps we can achieve sustainability through employing a wide array of shades to work together. 

So, what shades do you fall into?

 From Three Shades of Green:

Lime Green is the color of green consumerism. It aims to make environmentalism cool, continuing to provide the ever-higher standards of living we’re used to, only with a green twist. Hybrid cars, clean coal, corn-based ethanol and CFLs are some of the Lime Green topics circulating in the news these days. To companies with a Lime outlook, sustainability is a consumer trend that may or may not go away, but it’s certainly worth capitalizing on for now. The system is working great, say the Lime Greens – if anything, it just needs a little tinkering. Lime ideology is summed up with quasi-green oil giant BP’s slogan: “It’s a Start.”

Fortunately, the Lime Green ethic is fast being eclipsed by something a little more substantive. Grass Green, the middle shade, treats climate change, habitat destruction, and water pollution as real and dangerously pressing issues, and recognizes that we’ll have to make some serious changes to business as usual if we want to survive much longer. This is the shade of green espoused by popular environmental advocates like Paul Hawken, Amory Lovins and Bill McDonough, who call for a “new industrial revolution” that will transform our economy from one of inequality and great material waste to one of efficiency and abundance for all. How will this happen? Through ever-improving technology, social entrepreneurship, and sensible government regulation: think Cradle to Cradle, micro-loans, bike boulevards and carbon taxes. A fringe movement only a few years ago, the Grass Green philosophy is fast gaining ground in board rooms across the States: execs from top corporations like Whole Foods, Staples and Wal-Mart have been saying some remarkably Grassy stuff recently, and the cover story of the latest edition of BusinessWeek posits a near future where environmental responsibility is at the top of the corporate agenda.

Finally, there’s Forest Green. Inspired by the Deep Ecology movement of the 70s, Forest people claim that another industrial revolution is the last thing we need. The anthropocentric heritage of western civilization is what led to our current predicament in the first place, and any attempts to make our current system more sustainable are, to use ecophilosopher Rudolf Bahro’s term, “cleaning the teeth of the dragon.” We don’t have a chance at creating a truly sustainable society, Forest Greens argue, until we value the well-being of the planet over and above the flourishing of any particular species – including our own.

What would a Forest Green society look like? For one thing, it would be much smaller than the current one: a couple billion people at most. Levels of consumption would be far less than those we’re accustomed to in the overdeveloped world, with each person’s ecological footprint averaging a hectare or two. Our shelters and possessions would be modest but of high quality, and the production of food would be integrated into our cities and landscapes through design techniques such as permaculture. How we arrive at a Forest Green society is another question entirely; answers range from the enviro-anarchism of Derrick Jensen to the grassroots utopia-building of the ecovillage movement.

No comments

Clemens Vaster had a post with Blogger Types that I found interesting. 

I’m obviously in the “I want to Blog” section.  I really only started this recently and have been trying to stay active.  I’ve been a member of LiveJournal for a long time, and posting items in various personal “blogs” for a while as well.  But this blog has been the first that I have attempted to keep informative or at least invite discussion, rather than blather about my personal life.

Blogging is a media that I’ve recently grown interested in, and I like the idea of having a conversation with tons of people across the world.  It invites long posts (a bad habit of mine) unlike bulletin boards or forums.  The Blogosphere is really, in essence, the new newspaper or magazine, but much more accessible to the general public as writers. 

This means I get a chance to do the writing I’ve always wanted to do.  It also means that it is less likely to ever mean anything to anyone but me.

In my attempts to get a better grip on what I should be doing, I of course read other blogs.  Penelope Trunk’s information on How to Start a Blog contains a lot of interesting links and information, such as Finding a Niche and Choosing a Niche.  She even indicates that blogging will help my career.  Blonde2.0 suggests ways to make a blog more viewed, and Amy Gahran gives tips for successful blogs through conversation.

In reading these articles, it seems like the major questions to ask are - What do I know? Where do I want to go?  How can I make this blog appealing to people? 

But I think a more messy question is uncovered - Do I want to have a “professional blog” - and what exactly does that mean?

I certainly don’t want to have an online journal anymore.  I never felt like I could be totally honest in it anyway.  Because, unlike David’s Journal’s wishful thinking, what’s posted doesn’t necessary stay put.  That’s the issue with connecting to all your friends and acquaintances to a personal journal - you can’t really be HONEST about your feelings.  You can’t post about that annoying neighbor, or something your friend did that pissed you off.  Because, frankly, your friends are reading and you’ve just taken a personal issue and made it public, regardless of how “private” your journal is.  Even if the person you are posting about isn’t connected to you, they could always find it. 

I’ve seen huge dramas originate out of journal posts where someone talked about someone else in a negative way, which spurred on a retaliation post, and started a long friction between several people.  I’ve also seen relationships get severed through comment strings (ouch!) and snarky comments be used to berate someone for past wrongs - all passive aggressively because the majority of people cannot handle direct face-to-face conflict to deal with their issues.  Thus the personal journal becomes a forum for venting and attack. 

And all of this from just being connected to your friends, just like everyone is.  God help you if you are linked to for some reason as an example nationwide. 

So, I don’t want to be in there for the emotional vomiting or daily uninteresting or forced updates that many personal journals can be - or at least, I found that mine were becoming.  Some people can do it - misspotsit always keeps me interested in her personal journal, but I don’t have the pizazz to accomplish that.  And I think a lot of interest comes from her insight and detailed posts - and comments in various other areas of the web.

But back to the point - do I want a “professional blog” and what does that mean?  Can’t I just blog about things in general, and then people will find it and a great conversation will begin?

It sounds like that is a No. Having a professional blog means doing what many of the other blog articles mentioned: choosing a topic.  That involves having to get to know that topic, knowing other blogs out there about that topic, and more.  And writing about that topic and other topics that affect it all the time - including weekends.  You have to keep up with it.

Assuming anyone will be reading it anyway.  From the reading, it sounds like you have to be out there, commenting on other blogs, reading other blogs, really staying fresh with what is being discussed, and drop your URL everywhere to get traffic, and marketing plays a part as well. 

So, it comes down to What Do I Want? 

I think I want a forum where I can post ideas and articles where people will come in and read and comment, and a discussion will happen.  I’m not sure I have anything that I want to market or that I’m looking for international fame.  Sure, a part of me thinks it would be cool to be the well-known connosieur of widgets that everyone reads to know the “real deal”. 

And ultimately, the coolness factor has a lot to do with it in the end.  “Do you know Lane?    You should totally read her blog.”  Yeah…

But mostly, through the discussion, I want to return the favor to numerous bloggers that have answered my questions over and over again.  Or the blogs that have made me laugh so hard I had to do the potty dance (you know you’ve done it).   Or just really insightful thoughts, or just sharing information I didn’t expect to get.  Like Kathy Sierra’s blog that really inspired me on a few levels until its dramatic (and scary) end.

Do these goals equal a “professional blog”…

1. A place where I can write my thoughts, or share articles or information, about topics of interest to me…
2. where people from all over can discuss the topic and some people may learn or their lives may be made better through it?

…or do they belong somewhere else?

4 comments

 

When perusing blogs, I came across the article, “8 Reasons Windows Users Don’t Switch.” (care of SteelBuddha).

I thought I’d open the conversation to a less “Mac-oriented” world, if only to avoid the rabid bite-back.  I think Steven Leigh’s article has hit the nail on the head in just about every point.  (well…I would contend that Vista and I are not on speaking terms, but I digress…)  It is true that there are generalities made about those who use Windows (Window of Opportunity referrring to corporate people and big-whigs - those of us only interested in money and power) and those who use Apple (hipsters and artists, the cool people who make beautiful things, or hippies and trend fanatics.)

I’d like to respond to the points myself and perhaps add a couple others that may not have been considered.

I’ll start out with a discussion about my background with Macs.  I have had computers in my house since I was six years old (24 years) and it wasn’t until last year that I had an Apple.  However, at grade school we only had PET computers or the glorious Apple IIe - with the first MOUSE I had ever seen.  There was ONE in the entire rural school.  By the time I went to high school, they had PCs. I’ve had various PCs most of my life, usually on the low end.  My first husband had an old old old Apple II of some sort that was only suitable for playing Mah Jong and typing up term papers, which he still did on my PC. 

Last year, I obtained a three year old iMac laptop with OS X (no idea what animal) that had primarily been used as a speech pathology tool.  Within a few months, I was avoiding the thing as much as I could until we purchased a new computer.  We want to give it to a new owner, but that would require getting it to boot up again so we can erase our old files.

So I’ve been no Mac fan - but PCs have many problems too.

1.    Ignorance

It’s true - I lack knowledge about how Macs work and this is a huge hindrance for me.  While the author indicates that the GUI and task usability is intuitive, I find myself frustrated by Macs.  I find myself not knowing where to find some of the most basic things.  Whether this is due to years of familiarity with PCs or some disconnect in my brain, it still makes me leary about giving Apple a spin.

2.   The Office

This is a huge reason for me.  Every office I’ve ever worked in uses PCs and Windows exclusively, and I often bring work home.  These days I bring the work laptop home, but just the idea of having to switch platforms mentally is not appealing to me.

3.    Hardware

This wasn’t something I’d considered because I have enough ignorance about Apple to not know whether EVERYTHING they sell is customizable.  From reading this article, I note that it is NOT, and this too is a huge detractor.  What if I want to change the motherboard?  What if I want to add hardware?  A company that makes it hard to make my computer MINE would seem to me to be trying to squeeze extra dough out of the users.  It feels like leasing a car - I’m not allowed to fully use it, change it, or really make it MINE.

4.    Price

I know little about the price of Macs, but I can tell you something about the price of iPods.  Holy Moley!  We’ll get more into the price vs. the usability of that little piece of metal shortly.

5.     Lies

Steven brings up one of the top reasons why I’ve never gotten a Mac - none of the games on the shelves work with Macs.  Almost everything I’ve ever wanted to play has played on PC only…or if there was an Apple version, it was more expensive or hard to get. 

I’ve also had tons of my friends who do use Macs indicate that Macs are better, are superior, are more efficient, less buggy, etc etc.  My personal experience with Macs has not been any of these things.  In fact, I’ve always felt that Apple has pumped up its products to an unreal expectation.  They don’t appear to be easier to use, less expensive, better made, or all that better thought out.  I’ve always wondered, “What’s the big deal?”

 And let’s discuss the iPod.  I spent a LOT of money on the iPod for many reasons.  Nothing seems to equal hubris more than to say that you’ve created a device that works on both Apple and PC.  Then watch how clunky the connection to the PC works.  Nothing says, “Screw you” more than your iTunes library becoming corrupted 8 times in the span of one year.  At best, my iPod and my computer have a thin truce until one decides to vomit on the other.  I’ve also had to reset my iPod at least 6 times, had to reinstall iTunes three times.  At one point, just having the iPod plugged in would keep my computer from booting up.

No joke.  It is has been mainly my experience with the iPod that has kept me from really giving Apple a full out try.  I tried somewhat with my iMac laptop, but it died too.

Oh - and I’d like some background on that “Apples don’t get viruses” malarky.  The laptop went all wonky after it was subjected to some serious virus ridden docs.  Simple logic indicates that the viruses might have made a difference there.

6.   Windows Bashing

This ties in a lot with the previous, but I’ll add on that one of the reasons I know so little about Macs is because when I do hear about them, it is only in reference to how much Windows sucks.  The very fact that Apple portays PC users as “The Man” offends me.  I’m not Corporate America.  I’m quasi-average Jo.  I’m also an artist to some degree.   So, purporting that I’m on the “Dark Side” of the Force does not win me over.

7.   Vista

Vista has the capability to be super powerful.  But it is also super buggy, and the experience of moving to Vista (which was FORCED on many of us) makes me feel that changing to Apple would be similar.  Suddenly, certain hardware and tools didn’t work anymore.  Games and programs all had to go because Vista didn’t support them.  I cannot explain the level of annoyance this caused for my household.  So the very idea of going through an even BIGGER upheaval with a switch to Apple is anathema.

8.    Mac Users

This one is a large component - but I have to say the Apple user doesn’t fall far from the Apple Company.  Apple’s elitist attitude has positioned it as the snooty know-it-all that the regular person can’t get behind.  The same issues I have with our current administration (Bush & Co) is the problem I have with Apple - hubris and arrogance.  And I’ve read enough classical literature to know that those with hubris and arrogance always fall. 

Additional Reasons:

Comfort:  It’s comfortable to be using a PC.  It’s what I’ve been doing for years.  I know Apple frames that statement as part of the “old way” whereas Apple exemplifies the new generation.  But this isn’t Computers vs. Typewriters here.  It’s Pepsi vs. Coke.  Two similar products that accomplish the same goals in slightly different ways.  The pluses of changing to a Mac are simply not good enough to make me want to even consider changing.

Compatibility: Steven Leigh mentions in item #2 that MS Office compatibility is there.  Yet when I read reviews I read that compatibility between Apple and PC in MS Office is a joke.  All the things that highly efficient Office users want to do are not easy, or sometimes even possible.

This has been long, but I’d like to know what your feelings are.  What do you prefer to use and why?  If you’re a rabid Apple fan, feel free to explain (succinctly and courteously) why you feel Mac is the way to go.  Does the trendiness play a part?  Do you really feel it is easier to use? 

PC lovers - speak out as well.  I’d love to know of people out there who have both Apple and PC experience and ultimately chose PC.  Why?

And just for kicks, if you ever owned a TI-99, please give a shout-out here.  I’d love to commiserate with those who have experienced the Wumpus.

3 comments

Just as a note, the weirdness that would not allow people to comment on this blog has been resolved, and you may make comments either at Livejournal or at the Blog itself. 

Ta Da!

No comments

So I noted I was emailing someone today with the statement, “Yeah, sorry I didn’t get back to you right away.  It’s been crazy.”

And I suddenly realized that I write that statement ALL THE TIME.  As in, at least once a week do I tell someone that my week has been crazy, or crazy-busy.  

It’s true - I have something planned for every night this week, I work full 8 hour days, and during those 8 hour days I have to often contemplate things that I must deal with in those off hours.  And something rather crazy DID happen this week in addition to the regular busy-ness. 

And it is true that I tend to have things like this happening all the time - my weeks fill up pretty quickly with busy-ness, and it feels sort of crazy to get to the various things that I’ve put together.  And it feels like I always have a busy week to point to when I didn’t manage to get to the gym AGAIN.  Yeah. We won’t get into priorities here.

So, if you are crazy all the time, is that normal?  And what qualifies as relaxing? 

What qualifies in reality as crazy?  I mean, do I have to have a shower of pink frogs raining on my city to qualify as crazy?  Or can I just feel like I’ve got that wide-eyed crazed look like Howard Beale during his “mad as hell” speech? 

I don’t suppose that having too many outings with friends for drinks counts as “crazy” does it?

Can having a crazy situation occur in the midst of being busy count as a whole week of craziness?

Is the term relative to my experience?  If I feel like it is crazy, is it so?  Does one crazy event in a week make a whole week crazy from dealing with the reverb from that one event? Or do I have to have a packed schedule? 

For that matter, if I feel like work has been “crazy”, can I really carry that crazy-ness label over into my afterhours life?

Or does the craziness of my week depend on comparison to other people’s weeks for a crazy-meter rating of some sort?  Am I just purporting a crazy week when in reality my week is moderately busy compared to others?

Should I just say “Oh, I had a normal busy week,” with the knowledge that people knowing me will know that equals pretty darn busy?  Or am I trying to get drama points?  I note that I do not call a week insane unless something extremely wild or odd has occurred…like the random discovery of lypossage.

Have we, as Americans, grown too used to running around with a jam-packed day as our normal existence that it really IS “crazy” or “insane”?  Has our habit of long-hours, back-to-back meetings, fast-food nation style made us a burgeoning mad house of a country?  (I’m pretty sure Europe would give us a YES on that one.)

And does any of this give me the right to forget to call/email someone back?

What is “crazy” for you?  At what point do you start to describe your week as crazy? 

Two Crazy Quotes for you - one fitting this discussion, and one just funny as heck.

There is no salvation in becoming adapted to a world which is crazy.
–Henry Miller

You know the world is going crazy when the best rapper is a white guy, the best golfer is a black guy, the tallest guy in the NBA is Chinese, the Swiss hold the America’s Cup, France is accusing the U.S. of arrogance, Germany doesn’t want to go to war, and the three most powerful men in America are named ‘Bush’, ‘Dick’, and ‘Colon.’ Need I say more?

–Chris Rock

No comments

So, a few weeks ago I was waiting for the bus to go to work and a VW Bug pulled up to the intersection.  It looked like the bug from the Geek Squad - black and white with a round logo.  But this one said…

 GOD SQUAD

And various other things like, “Got God?” and the like.  There were a few other things written on it - websites and other contact information.  I unfortunately don’t remember any of them.

I’m lucky that there was someone else at the busstop with me who said, “hmm.  That’s different.”  I thought perhaps I was hallucinating, but I have a witness.

The modern VW Bug was black and white entirely, and attractively put together.  In the passenger seat was a youngish man, seemingly of an alternative crowd (think slender, lanky with mussed hair - very Bayview or East Side.  A pair of horn-rimmed glasses would have fit him perfectly.  Indie Rock? Or just Indie? I’m not sure what this style would be considered - K-Co, help me out here.  I should do a whole segment on these styles.)

I couldn’t see who was driving without seeming extremely obvious, and I wasn’t in an extremely obvious mood.  But I was definitely curious.

The other busstop waiter and I contemplated the purpose of this vehicle - it seemed as if parts of the information on the VW Bug were for drawing people to the ministry, but other parts were reaching out to the public.  It wasn’t overdone - but the messages were talking to different audiences.  Or perhaps they weren’t and I’m sufficiently a-religious enough to have missed them.  As a former Evangelical junkie, I would have thought that at least *I* would get the connection.  Apparently my turn to spirituality has nixed my ability to understand structured religious thought patterns.

So I finally remembered to look them up today.  And I can’t find a thing about a VW Bug saying GOD SQUAD.  But I did find some information about a popular set of speakers called The God Squad.  Apparently, they have a column and they also were on Imus in the Morning. 

Doing a little research (and I mean a little), I found that Rabbi Gellman is a Milwaukee native and former academic.  Perhaps this is the source of the God Squad VW Bug? 

Has anyone else seen this running around town? 

(note to self - must get tiny digital camera to take pics whereever I am as PROOF of my insanity.) 

2 comments

So, a conversation with some fellow …well, I don’t know what they are, because that’s just the problem…led me to believe that much like anything in language, terms for the socially-inept-but-intelligently-endowed-often-enjoying-science-and-fiction-and-the-combination-of-the-two subset of culture are not unanimously agreed upon.

Not clear?  How about this…no one can agree on the definition and heirarchy of the words GEEK, NERD, or DORK.

It appears we have various impressions of what these words mean, and we also have varying degrees of who belongs in which category.  So, here is our little experiment - please help us if you can!

1. What do you call yourself?
2. What is the heirarchy of “coolness” of these terms?
3. What do these terms mean to you?

Dictionary.com and Webster.com have varying definitions:

---

Dork Dictionary.com says noun Slang.

1.	a stupid or ridiculous person; jerk; nerd.

 (Dictionary.com also infers that Dork is a euphemism for a vulgar word that sounds similar.  Webster indicates that the etymology of Dork might come from said vulgar word.)

Webster says  

slang : nerd; also : jerk 4a

Geek

Dictionary.com says Slang. –noun

1.	a peculiar or otherwise dislikable person, esp. one who is perceived to be overly intellectual.

2.	a computer expert or enthusiast (a term of pride as self-reference, but often considered offensive when used by outsiders.)

3.	a carnival performer who performs sensationally morbid or disgusting acts, as biting off the head of a live chicken.

Webster says  

1 : a carnival performer often billed as a wild man whose act usually includes biting the head off a live chicken or snake
2 : a person often of an intellectual bent who is disliked
3 : an enthusiast or expert especially in a technological field or activity <computer geek>

Nerd

Dictionary.com says noun Slang.

1.	a stupid, irritating, ineffectual, or unattractive person.

2.	an intelligent but single-minded person obsessed with a nonsocial hobby or pursuit: a computer nerd.

Also, nurd.

Webster says  

: an unstylish, unattractive, or socially inept person; especially : one slavishly devoted to intellectual or academic pursuits <computer nerds>

---

So, the summary of those definitions appears to be the following:

• Nerds and Geeks are generally intellectual, whereas Dorks are stupid and equatable with jerks.
• Dork is the only definition with a comedy effect.  (ridiculous person)  This may explain its use by the Geek/Nerd community.
• Geek actually used to be a guy that bit the head off a chicken.
• Nerds are unattractive and obsessed with intellectual pursuits (Jean-Paul Sartre would fall in here then).
• Geek is the only one that references it can be a self-given title.

So, do these connect with what you understand of these terms?  How do they differ?  Do you ever use the terms for certain purposes, such as intimacy or humor?  (as in, say your girlfriend says a silly joke - do you lovingly call her a dork?)

Want my opinion?  Of course you do!

1. I am a Geek by personal definition.
2. Coolness level for me has always been Geek/Nerd/Dork.
3. Geek-ness usually meant interest in social geek activities such as watching science fiction, gaming, computers, and more.  Nerds did much of the same, but often had less of an understanding of social graces, perhaps were a little more intense in their following of certain things. I.e., Geeks watch some anime (perhaps grew up on Robotech) but Nerds watch it obsessively.  Dorks are social outcasts that try too hard, don’t “get it”, and don’t really belong. Dorks usually tried to like the same stuff as a certain group just to fit into that group, not because they really liked it.

Please note that I have not included Dweeb, Fatbeard, Knuckle-Dragging Mouth Breather or Basement Dweller.  These are negative labels used inside and outside the Geek/Nerd community as sub-categories, and are pretty obvious to detect.  Dweeb might be able to have its own discussion, but it is my experience that most people understand that it is a negative term.

2 comments