whoops.

I recently received an email from a friend that I worked with in montreal who said:

Matt, congrats on the law school acceptance. Which school? (I think you'd be a good lawyer. Reason? You convinced me to start littering and it stuck with me for a WHOLE month. That's pretty impressive given my short attention span.)

That is pretty funny. I was just spouting off some ridiculous argument while bored at lunch (I also once brought a soft-core romance novel and read the sexy parts out-loud for the entire lunch ... I got very bored with some frequency), that one should litter because hiding litter is worse for the environment, and someone actually littered for a month.

boo ya.

you know what this does? it convinces me to continue to bullshit. possibly even bullshit more. think of the potential benefits ... for me ...

squids!

The giant squid, which until recently had not been observed alive in its adult form, is the largest invertebrate; although it is possible that the colossal squid is even larger.

who names these things?

Oh, oh! (an adventure in government, you fools!)

Hon. Stéphane Dion (Leader of the Opposition, Lib.):
No, Mr. Speaker, it was booked. Everything was booked and everything was cut--

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

The Speaker:
Order. We must have a little order. The Prime Minister is not going to be able to hear the question. I think it is directed to him. We must have some order so we can hear the question and then get an answer. The hon. Leader of the Opposition has the floor. We will have some order, please.

Hon. Stéphane Dion:
Mr. Speaker, everything was booked. I know the Conservatives are very ashamed of what they are doing--

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

The Speaker:
Order. We have to get on with the question. The hon. Leader of the Opposition will want to put the question.

Hon. Stéphane Dion:
Mr. Speaker, beyond these figures, does the Prime Minister not realize that he is hitting students, the homeless and adult literacy programs? Does he not realize he is hitting Canadians with these cuts he is trying to hide from them?

Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC):
Mr. Speaker, he says they were booked. As for that $40 million missing in the sponsorship program, I am hoping that somebody over there will get booked as well.

These are things the Liberals promised the Canadian people for 13 years and never delivered.

[French]

Their record is an empty shell.

[English]

They are an empty shell. They have nothing to offer other than to promise the same things they failed to deliver before.

Hon. Lucienne Robillard (Westmount—Ville-Marie, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, the minority government continues to display false transparency. First, the Conservatives cut $1 billion from programs for Canadians without ever assessing the effectiveness or pertinence of these cuts and without assessing the programs. Now they are making further cuts, which the government tried to slip under the radar in the recently tabled economic and financial update, without saying a word about it.

Can the Prime Minister tell us why he hid the truth from all Canadians?

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

An hon. member: Calm down, you fools!

full circle

I don't want to parrot the thoughts of our friend on commercial, but the weekend was definitely excellent. I seem to be attached to vancouver, so I guess it is fortunate that I learned early how to read on moving vehicles.

Saw body worlds, which was absolutely amazing. I wanted to touch everything, to get inside the bodies, to move them and watch the muscles tense, to put food in and watch the process. I can see how this desire leads to dehumamization, and I was aware of a certain oddness in how I was treating people around me after the exhibit. I wonder how far the dehumanization can go. I worry a bit about this.

I sometimes think that my motivations are very misunderstood or, more likely, completely unknown. Why am I applying to law school and taking my med school pre-reqs?

There is a strong part of me that very much wants to divest myself of everything, move to the fringes of society, embrace the joy of intense simplicity. But I don't. I very much do not want to become part of rat-race. Certainly have no desire to spend my life trying to keep up. I am not especially fond of being judged (although I am fond of being told that I am great).

I have narrowed it down to 4 things: order, breakdown, ozymandius and logical extremes. I will expand on these later.

It seems that a good chunk of us recent, or soon to be, graduates are experiencing a bit of a life issue. Suddenly we have been thrust out of the educational womb and are realising that there is a real world. I have just been told that I have no idea what this is like, but I think that many forget that I did my real-life-learning pre-university. I didn't stamp mortgage papers and live with the Gypsies (two separate events) for naught. No, I was seeing what real life was like. When I let my acceptance to U of T lapse I was really in the real world. I assumed I would go back to school (but so do many of you), but it wasn't set in stone. I was wandering aimlessly too.

A huge issue for me is exploration. I don't believe in an afterlife, I don't believe in reincarnation. I think this is what we got. And so I feel like I must experience as much as possible of it. From this stems the order I spoke of. I want to work hard now, when I can, to get myself access to institutions that will soon be off limits. I could become a docter at 50, but it is would be difficult. But at 50 one can still kayak their way around the world. This doesn't mean that I don't want to kayak around the world now, because I do, but I won't if it precludes me doing things that I need to do to see the world from interesting places.

Of course, all of this thinking about motivation has made me value even more the power of experience, so I will be sure to take advantage of the beauty of nature. If any of you want to join me for a week long kayak trip up the coast of BC sometime this summer, I would totally be in.

Logical extreme is the fact that I do unto others. The system we have now, the reward system sure ain't great, but it is better than what we had before. Sure, it would be great if communism worked, but it doesn't. This was another point of the biological talk: Can society can convince everyone to be nice? Are our existences are made better by the establishments we construct? Anyway, I am not willing to have the establishment collapse at the moment, therefore I must continue to act within the establishment. It is only fair.

breakdown is perhaps the strongest reason I have for my actions. Science I studied to stop the breakdown, but there are better people than I for that job, people who are interested solely in research and not is socialising. Law I would do to work my way into government where I could bring about the change I wish to see. Doctors are needed, especially if things collapse.

ozymandius is what it is. I can't break easily out of the desire to do SOMETHING, regardless of how many nihilistic people tell me it doesn't matter. It also doesn't hurt, especially since my view of the THING is to decrease our footprint.

in conclusion, Chris Nohr.

in double conclusion, things are never what they seem, blogging is ridiculous, reasons are in flux, the outcomes seem to be the same, and things go full circle.

and now we know ...

The lungs before birth are completely collapsed, and so the
first breaths must inflate the lungs and open up the small
air sacs called alveoli, which are the actual site of oxygen
transfer to the blood. During the last trimester the fetus
starts secreting a fluid called surfactant into the alveoli.
The surfactant lowers the surface tension in the alveoli and
makes it easier to inflate them. Inadequate surfactant
production is one reason why premature infants often have a
much harder time breathing, and they may be given artificial
surfactant or cow surfactant to help them until their own
lungs start producing it. Premature infants also often have
another problem with breathing called apnea -- they
occasionally forget to breathe. For unclear reasons their
respiratory centers are not yet mature enough to control
consistent and continuous breathing.

I have been hanging out with too many babies. There were two at the potluck last night. Two whole babies. babies.

weeeeeee!

oh no!

christmas is over. school commences again tomorrow and I am suddenly feeling very tired, the stress of relaxation catching up to me.

the holiday was rounded out by a very nice trip to pender, with sam, tippi and kerria. we got drunk and watched simpsons and argued over board games and did some hiking. Tippi and I, after being ditched by the girls, went hiking along a small spit which turned out to be one of the most beautiful places I have ever been. It was a gorgeous forest surrounded by a rocky coast and the view was of the various gulf islands and the ferry terminal, which many may not find beautiful, but I love the ferries and watching them sail in just added to my perceived beauty.

On pender we ate like kings. My plan to cook more is working out wonderfully. I made artichoke, roasted garlic, spinach and zucchini pizza on the first night, then sam made stuffed peppers and crumble stuffed apples. Back in victoria, kerria and I made a meal with red broccoli and squash and peach crumble. I can't really afford to eat this well, but it is damn good. Although making crumble is pretty easy. Has anyone ever become sick of crumble?

Had a long talk about biology and realised that I really believed that biology informed all of our action, that society and its pressures stemmed solely from biological pressures and that we were powerless in the face of these pressures. After a somewhat stressful conversation, I am not so sure. I know that I harp on incessently about agency, and I certainly believe in agency, but a psuedo-agency, whereby one's biology forces one to make a certain decision while one believes themselves in control. This is not necessarily an urgent pressure - rather, it is a slow process, similar to waves breaking rocks into sand. One can make "socially conscious decisions" but ultimately the power of biology would win. This is what I thought, even if I hadn't fully fleshed it out. Anyway, I am going to try to flesh it out more, without pissing off the people who are willing to discuss it with me. The upshot of the argument, by the by - the main point of contension - was that men and women may think differently and do so not because of social pressures but because of biology.

The theory is admittedly convenient because it partially excuses socially inappropriate behavior.

watched Hotel Rwanda. gah. was angry at the western powers for withdrawing but couldn't figure out what an army would do in the face of genocidal hatred of a large population by another population. Large scale relocation? massive protection of a refugee camp? I haven't looked it up yet, but can someone provide an example of when an army was able to stifle genocide, when that army was not interested in being partisan or contributing to the death count. I also was a tad disappointed that the movie was so one-sided. I believe that the bloodshed was directed both ways, although I may be missing some of the subtleties.