Tag Archives: science

New Year’s Resolutions

Posted on by
Reply

I succeeded (#3) and gotten in stepwise directions towards (#1 and #2) my last year’s resolutions. Because of that, and because I’m awesome, I know I’ll be at least partly successful in these three resolutions. I have very good reasons to be more specific this year:

  1. Have at least one, preferably two, software products of mine become successful and attain a customer base. Likely contenders include CalCast/Maintenance Cast and a v2.0 RoR’s version of band-collab (what’s up right now is a bloody Drupal mess I wouldn’t wish upon my worst foes).
  2. To get one study of mine published in a peer-reviewed journal. Wait a minute, I don’t have any credentials! That little factor will make it all the more challenging and interesting. I have my eyes on certain food science journals. More details forthcoming…
  3. To acquire a patent. Provisional patent or patent pending will count for this one.

In addition to these, I’m serious about continuing my last year’s resolutions. That means two things – be good to my girlfriend, who I love, and try as hell to make better money than I did last year.

Oh, and to make things interesting, I’m going to make a deal with my friends that they can dunk me or something evil like that if I don’t make all three. And these are all fiendishly hard, aren’t they!!!

Devil’s Advocate

Posted on by
Reply

[Wo]men of reason bitch oft about the destroyers of reason – people who pay scientists to fudge their reports in disfavor of human impact on climate change, people who try to downplay evolution’s importance in shaping life on this planet, holocaust deniers and so on.

The end result, however, is ultimately a deeper understanding. Those who strain to come up with any minute flaw in generally accepted ideas will actually contribute to it as a very passionate and crazed devil’s advocate. In this way, our understanding of climate, biology and history will only deepen. Indeed, last year saw strides in evolution and biology and I can’t help but think evolution “skeptics” had a role to play in this.