I guess one could say I grew up in a relatively religious household, Dad being an ordained priest and all. However, it often amazes me how much more willing I am to weave scientific explanations into various bible stories. Many from both the religious and scientific communities would probably call me a heretic, or worse. I just fail to see how the two can not co-exist. At least, I know I’m not alone in my beliefs. I had the great fortune several years back of dancing with a group where there were others who felt that science was the tool God gave us to explore this wonderful universe He gave us.

Today, my mother and I were discussing the general uproar in the scientific community over the movie The Day After Tomorrow. I find it interesting that the same people who told us that one of the possible side effects of global warming was total flooding of the world are now up in arms because Hollywood finally traded their killer asteroids for a killer natural disaster.

As a detached observer, it only stands to reason that the world could conceivably be flooded. It has happened before. It will happen again. Things move in a cycle, only this time the cycle is being sped up by a certain species’ actions. Again, this is also not surprising.

As we were talking about the movie and global warming, my mother quoted an old favorite Billl Cosby sketch, “How long can you tread water?” I don’t know why, but that joke at that moment just triggered this realization. As a religious scholar, one looks at the story of Noah and his ark and says, “God punished us because we were evil.” Well, that may be, but we’re far worse now, and God hasn’t sent any plagues on us. As a scientific scholar, one would look at the story of Noah’s ark and say, “That is a clear example of flooding due to glaciers melting due to naturally occurring global warming.” The fact that many of the civilized cultures of the period have stories of a flood would support the scientist’s position over the religious scholar’s.

Of course, all of this comes out of my mouth, rather jumbled. My mother, bless her heart, manages to follow it enough to smile and tell me I should write a book about the correlations and relationships and analyses I find continuously. I can’t imagine anybody wanting to read such a disaster, but she seems to think somebody (multiple somebodies, actually) would go absolutely nuts over it.

I decided to try googling this idea, only to find that the two are linked either in an ultra-religious way, ignoring the general science inherent, or as a passing joke as a title of a lesson plan. Otherwise, the two seem to be unlinked…meaning that somehow it hasn’t been documented as a real possibility. Kind of makes me want to start this major history crawl looking for factual date correlations.

So, once again, my ability to weave science and religion together has led to a strange revelation and a possible project.

…to skimp on quality?

I look around my workplace and laugh frequently. My company is one of those high-stress, high stakes places. It has also started embracing quality. Everybody in the company is undergoing mass, multiple trainings on quality and problem solving. We are told repeatedly how we need to make quality or first priority.

Shortly after starting down this quality road, a number of things happened. First, one department had a new senior director and three new directors named. This would seem like a good thing. However, one of the the three caused great trouble for one of her projects last year with her timely activities, or lack thereof. She had great difficulty managing two projects, making poor priority choices, and aiding in the poor quality of one of the projects. She then turned the troubled project over to someone who had just joined the company, with no training on how to do his own job, let alone manage his project. This same woman is now over the project again, and causing its editor a great deal of anger and stress. (This editor was blamed for every single quality issue on this project a few months ago, and really isn’t looking to repeat the experience.)

Another department is so badly understaffed that they are having to prioritize projects. A team can be trained on and sent through three projects a day…where they should only be doing one project for two to six weeks. A third department is also badly understaffed, but with the recent realization that their department will pay for any mistake made by the company, the managers are going insane trying to make sure that there are absolutely no problems in this department.

We want to produce a quality product, but we seem to not care about the internal quality. Despite trainings and inspirational posters, we just can’t seem to get our mind around this concept.

I predict critical failure for this company in five years, unless they can turn this situation around.

Edit (January 13, 2009): Sure enough, this particular arm of the company in question was bought by one of their biggest rivals last year.

I was all set to duplicate a post between here and here on being multipational until I remembered that this is a technology week. So, in the interests of discussing something related to technology, I’d like to direct your attention to Sitepoint.

I really like this site. I don’t remember how I stumbled on it initially, thought it was probably through a link at w3schools. This site is just fabulous. As a complete novice to web design, I have found this site very useful. I even downloaded the sample chapters from some of the books, and refer to the site often while I’m working on my own site (which is happening at a snail’s pace). I also subscribe to both newsletters.

Why am I so hooked on this site? That’s easy. There are articles and tutorials that are written in a newbie-friendly way. The site in general is completely non-threatening, and the information is very useful. I’ve already mentioned that I use it as a favorite resource while learning and applying CSS. Yesterday, I found an article there that just discussed differences between various terms being bandied about by the more experienced developers. By the time I had finished that article, I started thinking maybe I could actually learn more about these things and maybe even work with them without becoming too confused. (The fact that I spent two years learning to program in what can only be called “training languages” probably helps a bit, too.)

I’m even looking to buy one of the books because it addressed its topic, and the theories behind why that topic should be considered and used…all in the sample chapters. It also tackles a topic that seems to be just beyond my grasp at the moment, and I’ve always preferred to learn things from an engaging presentation.

So…Sitepoint. Check it out. Subscribe to the newsletters. Play on the forums. Try out the tutorials. Have fun!

Author’s Note: Oddly enough, this post has now come to rest in the blog resulting from the originally debated posting site.

I read this rather interesting article today about the growing trend in girl bullies. It talks about how these bullies use psychological attacks to assert their superiority over their victims. The article also pointed out that it is typically girls with high self-esteem who perpetrate these acts, and the victim is selected because they received an honor the attacker did not (examples given include being elected to class office or being accepted to a cheerleading squad). According to the article, these events lead to a spark of jealousy that eventually causes the victim to be driven away from her friend.

So, now you’re probably looking at the title of this post and the description of this article and trying to figure out how the two connect. Let’s start by examining typically accepted female social interactions. Do you remember the old joke about girls always going to the bathroom together? This is the same idea. Women are naturally social, community-minded people. They want to work to support each other. In older times, this community bred sisterhood as women shared their experiences and their advice.

However, a change in the last century has also affected the dynamics of these groups. Where there might have been a respected elder in the past, there is now an alpha. Again, let’s start with a definition before looking at how this role affects the community dynamic. An Alpha, much like it is used in the non-human animal world, is a natural leader, recognized or otherwise. More than one Alpha in a group can often cause conflicts while the two Alphas sort out who will be the true Alpha for the group, although it is completely possible to have a group full of Alphas who figure out a way to exist peacefully with each Alpha having their own niche.

Please note that this alpha individual can be anyone in the group. In male groups, the alpha can often be defined by his need for power or superiority, or for his great wisdom, and it is often easy to discern the identity of the Alpha. In female groups, however, defining the Alpha is a bit trickier. More often than not, it a woman who has attained the respect of her peers and is looked to for advice. This seems very similar to the idea of the community elder discussed earlier. However, with women gaining a more equal footing with their male counterparts, they are also learning to play games by the men’s rules to continue to gain that footing.

These communities which once shared a bond of sisterhood and a hierarchy of elders and matrons now finds itself with a woman in search of her own power playing rather ruthlessly to get the power that she feels will further empower her. As the article points out, she is someone with a storng self-esteem. She also likely has a strong sense of self, which draws her companions to her in the hopes that some of that self-empowerment will rub off on them, too. And when the Alpha’s status is challenged by an up-and-coming Alpha, the Alpha’s response is to remove the threat. She can’t challenge her opposition to a friendly game of fisticuffs, as that would be unbecoming for a lady. To just shun someone in this day and age can have serious repercussions that are best avoided. So, the Alpha uses the last weapon in her arsenal: her leadership.

The Alpha sets an example to the rest of her community by starting to discredit the intended victim, understanding that as the others start to accept the discrediting comments as truth they will start to distance themselves from the victim. This, in turn, robs the victim of the security of the community, which is what has been a driving force for so many women. Without her community, without a support system to lean on, the victim goes to find another community to lean on. The Alpha’s job is complete. The threat is neutralized, and the Alpha can return to her happy status.

The article gives suggestions for how to watch for bullying or bullied behavior. It does little, however, to suggest suitable resolutions. These days, girls are being given every opportunity to become leaders in their fields, and yet they are no longer trained to handle issues politely, graciously, and delicately. Rather, they are bombarded with magazines filled with the latest gossip. They use online forums to post their own gossip, with little regard for facts or concern for how their words will hurt another.

Perhaps instead of promoting this behavior, we should be turning these girls toward better role models, better reading. They should be challenged from an early age to distinguish tabloid gossip from facts, to analyze these approaches from an emotional standpoint. As we refuse to tolerate boys fighting, we should also refuse to tolerate girls’ gossiping. The slam books from our own childhood that are starting to resurface for today’s generation need to be frowned upon. Instead, girls should be taught their written words are permanent and cannot be taken back, even if they are deleted.

As we guide boys to grow beyond the need to fight at the drop of a hat, we also need to guide girls to grow beyond the need to destroy someone through psychological games.

Originally posted at cybergrrl.blogspot.com on 14 May 2004

This one’s going to be shaky. I’ve only spent a little time looking into this one so far.

A number of people have told me recently that they wish they had a dictionary that was specific to me whenever they talk to me. I have many varied interests, and have had multiple interests my whole life, but I’ve never had so many so interested in understanding all of it.

I started trying to figure out the best way to go about creating such a thing. A number of people I know are fascinated with the wiki phenomenon, so I decided to poke through it to see what it was all about. From what I’m gathering, Wikipedia itself is an online encyclopedia that allows its users to update articles in an effort to create a very thorough resource. It even allows links to related entries to be created in an article. It’s a great way to allow a term to be defined without losing the storytelling quality of the initial article. The Wikipedia is even searchable, always a nice feature.

I am looking at this as a possible solution. There are some very nice resources on how to create your own wiki. However, they require a knowledge that I don’t have right now, knowledge of PHP. As I have been rather half-heartedly trying to learn HTML and CSS (and, apparently without realizing it, XHTML), I’m almost afraid to add anything else to the mix. I’m fairly certain I could do it, I’m just not sure if I have the time for it right now.

Right now, it’s just one more thing to think about while I’m trying to decide how to go about this. If any readers have a suggestion, feel free to leave a comment.

My life seems to be full of interesting conversations this week.

At work, I overheard two people talking over the copier.  One was teasing the other for never working on science items.  The other protested, claiming that she doesn’t touch science.  She just doesn’t like it.  It caused a really interesting thought to cross my mind: Try to spend a day without interacting with any science.

At its core, it’s an impossible thought.  Every move we make is controlled by biology, more specfically anatomy.  That morning coffee so many people crave?  Good morning, chemistry and botany.  The sheer physics of driving to work every day (or telecommuting for those who are able to work from home).  It’s impossible.  It’s a great thought, but it’s impossible.

Then it occurred to me that this same experiment would be great for students if you shift the content focus from science to math.  When a student says, “Why do I have to learn this?  I’ll never use this in my real life,” I think that student should be challenged to try to finish the rest of the day without any math.  This includes the use of numbers, since they are a math concept.  I wonder how long it would take for the student to surrender.

Then tonight at dinner, my father was lamenting the lack of strong male role models on sitcoms.  We all thought about it for a bit, trying to come up with male characters who were not idiots, bumblers, out for the lowest common denominator laugh.  I wisely managed to not say my normal retort of, “Well, that’s because your average guy is a charming oaf.” (My father, who is a typical man, prides himself on the fact that he’s an above-average man.)  Anyway, we sit there thinking.  The list we came up with is as follows: Martin Crane (Frasier).  That’s it.  I suggested Will Truman (Will and Grace), but was vetoed because Will is gay and therefore doesn’t count apparently.  I offered a couple of suggestions from the shows I watch, but they were discounted because they weren’t from sitcoms.  (In case you’re curious, Eric Camden, Jonathan Kent, and Rupert Giles.  Seventh Heaven, Smallville, and Buffy the Vampire Slayer respectively.)

Granted, I really don’t watch a lot of sitcoms.  My mother watches several.  My father, otherwise known as the man who started this conversation, only watches one evening of sitcoms with Mom.  More accurately, he watches about 30 minutes and walks off.  So, he doesn’t exactly have the most relevant knowledge on the matter.  It was interesting to note that we could come up with so few strong positive male role models.  We’re always screaming for empowered female role models.  Is it possible we’ve completely emasculated the fictional male in our search for the new ideal woman?

Just some things to think on.

I have always been intrigued by magnetic poetry. It’s such a fascinating medium, allowing for random fits of creativity. However, I find it has two drawbacks: too few words and no way to keep a sudden flash of inspriation. So, to fix the second problem and allow these words to go on to new ideas, I am recording these lines.

It should be made clear that I have two sets of magnetic poetry occupying one of my cabinets at my job at a publishing company, so a number of us have contributed to this list, although I have forgotten now who specifically wrote some of these gems. You can see we had a lot to say:

The honest scholar understands the beauty of chocolate.

I believe in sisterly support.

Dinner tasted funny.

You were deftly spurned in his missive.

Never crass. Always clever.

Smiling is the better solution.

Relax and share a laugh with a friend.

That character has verbose language.

The best companion always remembers and never tells.

Friendship is full of comforting thoughts.

I delirious. (The author wanted to write “I get delirious” from a Prince song, but we discovered that “get” isn’t in either set. She decided to go for a more “I, Claudius” approach instead.)

She was twice as strong as any woman.

Elucidate on this word.

I rue Kafkaesque observation.

Our generous miscreant

Like a munificent child

Ameliorate admonition

Representing a cunning and nefarious faction/from our almost pithy domicile/an individual could usurp/with temerity and guile.

The warmest word will bring people together.

As the last little pairing on my cabinet says, “More soon!”

© 2010 Rebecca Thomas Designs Suffusion WordPress theme by Sayontan Sinha

Bad Behavior has blocked 72 access attempts in the last 7 days.