Sunday, February 26, 2006
Find the Hidden Giraffe
In the apparently blurred picture shown in my profile, you can make out a hidden giraffe if you look hard enough. Enjoy!
Saturday, February 25, 2006
Happy B-Day Isaiah!
Okay, it was actually yesterday. However, he is having his party today. At times it is hard to picture him being six years old and at other times it seems like he has been around forever. Speaking of being around forever, he was way too wound up last night to go to sleep. Eventually he remembered (on his own) the last time he stayed up (when he watched a Looney Toons box set with me) and what a headache he had the next morning. He sent him off to bed with a "Night Dad!" and we didn't hear from him again. People (especially kids) are funny critters.
Anyhow, happy birthday kiddo!
Anyhow, happy birthday kiddo!
Friday, February 24, 2006
Butterfly...
...how I love it when you flutter by
All the flowers in my garden grow
'Cause they love you so
Butterfly
So there I am, getting ready to do the sprint workout. It is all 25s and 50s. Feeling a bit ornery, I do the whole first half of the workout butterfly.
Note to self: Go stick your lethargy in your ear...
Thursday, February 23, 2006
Plateau
My athletic energy has leveled off this past week. I've hit that stage where I don't feel like pushing myself anymore. I've decided not to sign up for the swim meet in April - again, too many other things going on. I have a sprint workout in about an hour that I'm not really looking forward to.
On the upside, I am halfway through my last semester! Yea me!
I've been in contact with a few professional scouters lately and they all have pretty much the same thing to say: The first two years are the hardest...like 60+ hours a week hard. Ugg.
On the upside, if you can make it through the third year, you are set. Yea me.
I've also been trying to go to sleep earlier and quit my late night snacks. My body is still adjusting and that could account for my lethargic feelings lately.
On the upside...oh, who am I kidding? I've been lethargic my whole life. Umm...yea me...?
On the upside, I am halfway through my last semester! Yea me!
I've been in contact with a few professional scouters lately and they all have pretty much the same thing to say: The first two years are the hardest...like 60+ hours a week hard. Ugg.
On the upside, if you can make it through the third year, you are set. Yea me.
I've also been trying to go to sleep earlier and quit my late night snacks. My body is still adjusting and that could account for my lethargic feelings lately.
On the upside...oh, who am I kidding? I've been lethargic my whole life. Umm...yea me...?
Monday, February 20, 2006
Paleo-Indian Migration Into South America
A sample of my anthropological writing I spent the better part of today putting together. WARNING! It is long. It is dry. And I don't expect anyone to read the whole thing (including my professor). No comment are necessary unless you are strangely into this stuff as much as I am.
Paleo-Indian Migration Into South America
Modern scientific theory states that the human occupation of the American continents began around 12,000 years ago with the crossing of the northern land bridge of Beringia. Humans then moved south, filling North America with a culture referred to as Clovis, and then into South America. Although this model is commonly accepted, do the South American Paleo-Indian cultures represent a natural extension of the Clovis culture or do they represent a completely separate cultural complex?
It is commonly accepted that the New World was colonized rapidly (Anderson and Gillam 2000), but exactly how and why are still being debated. One theory makes the assumption that as hunter-gatherer bands grew in population, they split and the new group formed its territory adjacent to the original group. This sets up a chain of roughly circular territories that stretch throughout the continents. Using this “string-of-pearls movement scenario…[it] would have required 30 territories or ‘pearls’ to span North America, with another 24 required to reach the southern cone of South America” (Anderson and Gillam 2000:57). At that rate, it would have taken four to five thousand years to fill both continents, which Anderson and Gillam state as being much too long to fit the current archaeological data.
The next theory takes the accepted timeline into account as well as the scattered nature of Paleo-Indian sites. It is called the “frog-leaping” pattern and suggests that when hunter-gatherer bands split, the new group would move to a distant location instead of residing nearby. When looking at the archeological record in North America, the heavily clustered, but widely separated, locations of Clovis artifacts lends some credibility to the frog-leaping theory. There are, however, still those who are not convinced.
Moore and Moseley believe that the small numbers that Anderson and Gillam used in their population models cannot constitute a viable breeding pool for the colonization of two entire continents. The two major problems they identify as limited population expansion are incest taboos and sex ratio at birth (Moore and Mosely 2001). Within small populations, there is an increased chance that individuals are closely related to one another and unless the incest taboo developed recently in human cultures, which is not supported by anthropological studies, there would be a limited number of potential mates for any particular individual. Also, there is the possibility that the children born in a small community might all be of the same sex.
Using a mathematical model, they ran a simulation that “does not permit marriage between siblings, between child and parent or parents’ siblings, between child and grandparents, or between first cousins, but allows women to marry polygynously” (Moore and Mosely 2001:527). Even though they ran the simulation with different numbers of starting populations, in every case they lasted less than one thousand years. The largest determining factor was the number of males in each generation – the more males born, the shorter the population as a whole survived.
This being the case, Moore and Mosely are convinced that the frog-leaping model, which puts groups in relative mating isolation, is incorrect. In order for a population to survive, it must have contact with nearby groups to exchange mates, and thus they support the string-of-pearls method in spite of its shortcomings.
Anderson and Gillam responded with a very interesting observation: “The fact that isolated band-sized groups of 25 people could go extinct within a comparatively short time…may help explain why pre-Clovis archaeological remains are so uncommon in the New World – small numbers of people may have been present much earlier then traditionally thought, but prior to much before ca. 13,500 cal. B.P. most or all probably died out, representing ‘failed’ migrations, and hence leaving the spotty, varied, and somewhat ambiguous archaeological record that characterizes the pre-Clovis era” (Anderson and Gillam 2001:531). They also have a greater faith in the ability of human culture to overcome environmental challenges that widely separated communities might be faced with (Anderson and Gillam 2001:532).
But what would happen if humans were faced with barriers that culture could not overcome? The environments of North America are very different from those found in Central and South America. Could the human body adapt as quickly to the new environs as the current colonization models suggest? It is clear from the archaeological record that the Clovis culture was not only widely spread across North America, but also highly mobile due to the spread of raw lithic material from specific regions across the continent. But in South America, the Clovis tradition is conspicuously absent. One theory to explain this is called the “Disease Barrier Hypothesis” (Waguespack 2002).
Although the environment of Central and South America have changed over the past 13,000 years, archeological reconstruction “indicate that tropical rainforests extended across the northern portion of South America during the period of human colonization” (Waguespack 2002:230). While North America had its share of diseases, tropical regions generally have a higher concentration of pathogens and would have to be crossed in order for the colonization of South America to take place.
Highly mobile hunter-gatherer populations are more likely to encounter detrimental pathogens and, as they travel, spread that pathogen to others – especially if the populations are large enough to support frequent contact. However, we know from the historic record that diseases such as smallpox could not have had such a devastating effect on indigenous cultures if it wasn’t for the increase in population and decrease in mobility, therefore, “for pathogens to truly present a colonization barrier population growth and mobility must be significantly reduced from previously inhabited, less disease prone, originating environments” (Waguespack 2002:234). Whether or not the tropical zones created such a barrier is difficult to determine. The presence of modern pathogens does not automatically suggest a limiting factor to ancient colonization, but it does provide a plausible excuse for the lack of Clovis artifacts in South America.
As an alternative to travel through the tropics by land, evidence of early marine resource use in South America may imply the use of coastal/marine travel to bypass the tropical environments. Excavations at Quebrada Jaguay in southern Peru show that marine resources were being used around 11,000 – 13,000 YBP (Sandweiss 1998). This in conjunction with sites along the Pacific coast in North America, suggest “that some early inhabitants of the Americas migrated along the Pacific coasts of North and South America, separately from those who moved through the interior” (Sandweiss 1998:1832). Certainly by 10,000 years ago, the coastal regions of South America were colonized and heavily used for resources, as opposed to earlier where Sandweiss suggests that the human occupation might have happened only in seasonal rounds – living part of the time in the highlands and part of the time on the coast.
Within the tropical regions of South America, there is evidence for human occupation that is quite distinct from the northern Clovis culture. Sites in the Amazonian basin have been identified as possible Paleo-Indian artifacts that are contemporary with Clovis but fit neither a Clovis nor a pre-Clovis theory. Bifacial stone points have been found near Monte Alegre, although the dates for such finds are hotly debated. Roosevelt et al. (1996) contend that the Caverna da Pedra Pintada site near Monte Alegre are indeed of a Paleo-Indian age instead of from a later time as others argue (Haynes, Reanier, and Barse 1997). The debate continues as the implications of sites such as these may ultimately determine the longevity of the Clovis First hypothesis.
Discussion
For the Clovis culture to have colonized both American continents, they would have had to been highly mobile and have a high fertility rate. Todd Surovell (2000) looked at whether those two factors are incompatible. He looks at two types of groups. One he calls “high residential foragers” who move their base camp frequently, maximizing “the distances walked annually while moving base camps, but minimizes daily foraging distances” (Surovell 2000:498-499). The other type is “low residential foragers” who “move base camps infrequently, thus minimizing residential mobility and maximizing foraging distances. This strategy instead emphasizes moving food to people” (Surovell 2000:499).
At first it seems that high mobility and high fertility are at odds with each other. However, Surovell’s study shows that less distance is spent moving the base camp more frequently, since less distance is traveled on a daily basis. Therefore, groups that have a more mobile base camp can afford to spend more energy on childcare. This becomes more interesting when compared to modern hunter-gatherer in tropical locales. Those groups that “move most frequently (Ache, Hill Pandaram, and Hadza) are also characterized by the highest levels of fertility” (Surovell 2000:504).
Using this strategy, Surovell suggests that Paleo-Indian cultures could have traveled long distances, accessed the valuable lithic raw materials, and still have contact with neighboring groups for mate exchange. As these bands reached the tropics, they would have tried to retain their highly mobile and highly fertile lifestyle. Diseases reduced mobility and contact between groups spread the pathogens; those that survived then spread out into the South American continent. If this scenario took place in pre-Clovis times, perhaps those diseases were what reduced those populations and allowed for the spread of Clovis in the north while limiting it in the south.
The evidences to support or refute the connection between South American Paleo-Indian cultures and the Clovis culture of North America are not accepted by all parts of the community of archaeologists. All that can be safely said is that Clovis spread throughout North America by any number of means, and that the cultural remains stopped in the northern part of Central America. The result is that there are two areas that are separate and distinct from each other. As Jared Diamond first wrote in his book The Third Chimpanzee (1992) and later expanded upon in Guns, Germs, and Steel (1997), the New World lay in a north-south orientation with the tropics dividing it into two halves – something not seen in the Old World which lay on an east-west axis. While not commenting upon the relations between the two cultural complexes, he believes that the tropics produced a barrier (but perhaps not necessarily a disease barrier) to the movement of people and, more importantly, to the movement of plants and animals.
Llamas, alpacas, guinea pigs, and potatoes never spread into Northern America and even “many crops that were apparently shared prehistorically between North and South America [cotton, beans, lima beans, chili peppers, and tobacco] actually occurred as different varieties or even species in the two continents, suggesting that they were domesticated independently in both areas” (Diamond 1992:246). With such variation in flora and fauna, it should come as no surprise that human cultures that may or may not be in existence at the same time, have just as much variety regardless of common heritage.
Conclusion
With the current level of knowledge and archaeological sites, it is impossible to determine the exact nature of the South American Paleo-Indians. Changes in environment, geography, and human behavior place obstructions to recreating an accurate picture of human migration patterns. While the northern temperate plains show a relatively simple picture, the tropical zone creates a barrier of sorts and it is perhaps a moot point on whether or not Clovis peoples struggled their way through. Whether on foot or by boat, if some did get through they were, perhaps, so depopulated and isolated from those in the north that they would be, in essence, in a completely new New World and would be starting a new migration point from which to colonize it.
References Cited
Anderson, David G. and J. Christopher Gillam.
2000 Paleoindian Colonization of the Americas: Implications from an Examination of Physiography, Demography, and Artifact Distribution. American Antiquity 65(1):43-66.
Anderson, David G. and J. Christopher Gillam.
2001 Paleoindian Interaction and Mating Networks: Reply to Moore and Moseley. American Antiquity 66(3):530-535.
Diamond, Jared
1992 The Third Chimpanzee: The Evolution and Future of the Human Animal. Harper Perennial, New York.
Diamond, Jared
1997 Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Society. W. W. Norton & Company, Inc, New York.
Haynes Jr., C. Vance, Richard E. Reanier, and William Barse.
1997 Dating a Paleoindian Site in the Amazon in Comparison with Clovis Culture. Science 275(5380):1948-1952.
Moore, John H. and Michael E. Moseley.
2001 How Many Frogs Does it Take to Leap Around the Americas? Comments on Anderson and Gillam. American Antiquity 66(3):526-529.
Roosevelt, A.C., da Costa, M. Lima, Machado, C. Lopes, Michab, M, et al.
1996 Paleoindian Cave Dwellers in the Amazon: The Peopling of the Americas. Science 272(5260):373-385.
Sandweiss, Daniel H., Heather McInnis, Richard L. Burger, Asuncion Cano, Bernardino Ojeda, Rolando Paredes, Maria del Carmen Sandweiss, and Michael D. Glascock.
1998 Quebrada Jaguay: Early South American Maritime Adaptations. Science 281(5384):1830-1832.
Surovell, Todd A.
2000 Early Paleoindian Woman, Children, Mobility, and Fertility. American Antiquity 65(3):493-508.
Waguespack, Nicole M.
2002 Colonization of the Americas: Disease Ecology and the Paeloindian Lifestyle. Human Ecology 30(2):227-243.
Modern scientific theory states that the human occupation of the American continents began around 12,000 years ago with the crossing of the northern land bridge of Beringia. Humans then moved south, filling North America with a culture referred to as Clovis, and then into South America. Although this model is commonly accepted, do the South American Paleo-Indian cultures represent a natural extension of the Clovis culture or do they represent a completely separate cultural complex?
It is commonly accepted that the New World was colonized rapidly (Anderson and Gillam 2000), but exactly how and why are still being debated. One theory makes the assumption that as hunter-gatherer bands grew in population, they split and the new group formed its territory adjacent to the original group. This sets up a chain of roughly circular territories that stretch throughout the continents. Using this “string-of-pearls movement scenario…[it] would have required 30 territories or ‘pearls’ to span North America, with another 24 required to reach the southern cone of South America” (Anderson and Gillam 2000:57). At that rate, it would have taken four to five thousand years to fill both continents, which Anderson and Gillam state as being much too long to fit the current archaeological data.
The next theory takes the accepted timeline into account as well as the scattered nature of Paleo-Indian sites. It is called the “frog-leaping” pattern and suggests that when hunter-gatherer bands split, the new group would move to a distant location instead of residing nearby. When looking at the archeological record in North America, the heavily clustered, but widely separated, locations of Clovis artifacts lends some credibility to the frog-leaping theory. There are, however, still those who are not convinced.
Moore and Moseley believe that the small numbers that Anderson and Gillam used in their population models cannot constitute a viable breeding pool for the colonization of two entire continents. The two major problems they identify as limited population expansion are incest taboos and sex ratio at birth (Moore and Mosely 2001). Within small populations, there is an increased chance that individuals are closely related to one another and unless the incest taboo developed recently in human cultures, which is not supported by anthropological studies, there would be a limited number of potential mates for any particular individual. Also, there is the possibility that the children born in a small community might all be of the same sex.
Using a mathematical model, they ran a simulation that “does not permit marriage between siblings, between child and parent or parents’ siblings, between child and grandparents, or between first cousins, but allows women to marry polygynously” (Moore and Mosely 2001:527). Even though they ran the simulation with different numbers of starting populations, in every case they lasted less than one thousand years. The largest determining factor was the number of males in each generation – the more males born, the shorter the population as a whole survived.
This being the case, Moore and Mosely are convinced that the frog-leaping model, which puts groups in relative mating isolation, is incorrect. In order for a population to survive, it must have contact with nearby groups to exchange mates, and thus they support the string-of-pearls method in spite of its shortcomings.
Anderson and Gillam responded with a very interesting observation: “The fact that isolated band-sized groups of 25 people could go extinct within a comparatively short time…may help explain why pre-Clovis archaeological remains are so uncommon in the New World – small numbers of people may have been present much earlier then traditionally thought, but prior to much before ca. 13,500 cal. B.P. most or all probably died out, representing ‘failed’ migrations, and hence leaving the spotty, varied, and somewhat ambiguous archaeological record that characterizes the pre-Clovis era” (Anderson and Gillam 2001:531). They also have a greater faith in the ability of human culture to overcome environmental challenges that widely separated communities might be faced with (Anderson and Gillam 2001:532).
But what would happen if humans were faced with barriers that culture could not overcome? The environments of North America are very different from those found in Central and South America. Could the human body adapt as quickly to the new environs as the current colonization models suggest? It is clear from the archaeological record that the Clovis culture was not only widely spread across North America, but also highly mobile due to the spread of raw lithic material from specific regions across the continent. But in South America, the Clovis tradition is conspicuously absent. One theory to explain this is called the “Disease Barrier Hypothesis” (Waguespack 2002).
Although the environment of Central and South America have changed over the past 13,000 years, archeological reconstruction “indicate that tropical rainforests extended across the northern portion of South America during the period of human colonization” (Waguespack 2002:230). While North America had its share of diseases, tropical regions generally have a higher concentration of pathogens and would have to be crossed in order for the colonization of South America to take place.
Highly mobile hunter-gatherer populations are more likely to encounter detrimental pathogens and, as they travel, spread that pathogen to others – especially if the populations are large enough to support frequent contact. However, we know from the historic record that diseases such as smallpox could not have had such a devastating effect on indigenous cultures if it wasn’t for the increase in population and decrease in mobility, therefore, “for pathogens to truly present a colonization barrier population growth and mobility must be significantly reduced from previously inhabited, less disease prone, originating environments” (Waguespack 2002:234). Whether or not the tropical zones created such a barrier is difficult to determine. The presence of modern pathogens does not automatically suggest a limiting factor to ancient colonization, but it does provide a plausible excuse for the lack of Clovis artifacts in South America.
As an alternative to travel through the tropics by land, evidence of early marine resource use in South America may imply the use of coastal/marine travel to bypass the tropical environments. Excavations at Quebrada Jaguay in southern Peru show that marine resources were being used around 11,000 – 13,000 YBP (Sandweiss 1998). This in conjunction with sites along the Pacific coast in North America, suggest “that some early inhabitants of the Americas migrated along the Pacific coasts of North and South America, separately from those who moved through the interior” (Sandweiss 1998:1832). Certainly by 10,000 years ago, the coastal regions of South America were colonized and heavily used for resources, as opposed to earlier where Sandweiss suggests that the human occupation might have happened only in seasonal rounds – living part of the time in the highlands and part of the time on the coast.
Within the tropical regions of South America, there is evidence for human occupation that is quite distinct from the northern Clovis culture. Sites in the Amazonian basin have been identified as possible Paleo-Indian artifacts that are contemporary with Clovis but fit neither a Clovis nor a pre-Clovis theory. Bifacial stone points have been found near Monte Alegre, although the dates for such finds are hotly debated. Roosevelt et al. (1996) contend that the Caverna da Pedra Pintada site near Monte Alegre are indeed of a Paleo-Indian age instead of from a later time as others argue (Haynes, Reanier, and Barse 1997). The debate continues as the implications of sites such as these may ultimately determine the longevity of the Clovis First hypothesis.
Discussion
For the Clovis culture to have colonized both American continents, they would have had to been highly mobile and have a high fertility rate. Todd Surovell (2000) looked at whether those two factors are incompatible. He looks at two types of groups. One he calls “high residential foragers” who move their base camp frequently, maximizing “the distances walked annually while moving base camps, but minimizes daily foraging distances” (Surovell 2000:498-499). The other type is “low residential foragers” who “move base camps infrequently, thus minimizing residential mobility and maximizing foraging distances. This strategy instead emphasizes moving food to people” (Surovell 2000:499).
At first it seems that high mobility and high fertility are at odds with each other. However, Surovell’s study shows that less distance is spent moving the base camp more frequently, since less distance is traveled on a daily basis. Therefore, groups that have a more mobile base camp can afford to spend more energy on childcare. This becomes more interesting when compared to modern hunter-gatherer in tropical locales. Those groups that “move most frequently (Ache, Hill Pandaram, and Hadza) are also characterized by the highest levels of fertility” (Surovell 2000:504).
Using this strategy, Surovell suggests that Paleo-Indian cultures could have traveled long distances, accessed the valuable lithic raw materials, and still have contact with neighboring groups for mate exchange. As these bands reached the tropics, they would have tried to retain their highly mobile and highly fertile lifestyle. Diseases reduced mobility and contact between groups spread the pathogens; those that survived then spread out into the South American continent. If this scenario took place in pre-Clovis times, perhaps those diseases were what reduced those populations and allowed for the spread of Clovis in the north while limiting it in the south.
The evidences to support or refute the connection between South American Paleo-Indian cultures and the Clovis culture of North America are not accepted by all parts of the community of archaeologists. All that can be safely said is that Clovis spread throughout North America by any number of means, and that the cultural remains stopped in the northern part of Central America. The result is that there are two areas that are separate and distinct from each other. As Jared Diamond first wrote in his book The Third Chimpanzee (1992) and later expanded upon in Guns, Germs, and Steel (1997), the New World lay in a north-south orientation with the tropics dividing it into two halves – something not seen in the Old World which lay on an east-west axis. While not commenting upon the relations between the two cultural complexes, he believes that the tropics produced a barrier (but perhaps not necessarily a disease barrier) to the movement of people and, more importantly, to the movement of plants and animals.
Llamas, alpacas, guinea pigs, and potatoes never spread into Northern America and even “many crops that were apparently shared prehistorically between North and South America [cotton, beans, lima beans, chili peppers, and tobacco] actually occurred as different varieties or even species in the two continents, suggesting that they were domesticated independently in both areas” (Diamond 1992:246). With such variation in flora and fauna, it should come as no surprise that human cultures that may or may not be in existence at the same time, have just as much variety regardless of common heritage.
Conclusion
With the current level of knowledge and archaeological sites, it is impossible to determine the exact nature of the South American Paleo-Indians. Changes in environment, geography, and human behavior place obstructions to recreating an accurate picture of human migration patterns. While the northern temperate plains show a relatively simple picture, the tropical zone creates a barrier of sorts and it is perhaps a moot point on whether or not Clovis peoples struggled their way through. Whether on foot or by boat, if some did get through they were, perhaps, so depopulated and isolated from those in the north that they would be, in essence, in a completely new New World and would be starting a new migration point from which to colonize it.
Anderson, David G. and J. Christopher Gillam.
2000 Paleoindian Colonization of the Americas: Implications from an Examination of Physiography, Demography, and Artifact Distribution. American Antiquity 65(1):43-66.
Anderson, David G. and J. Christopher Gillam.
2001 Paleoindian Interaction and Mating Networks: Reply to Moore and Moseley. American Antiquity 66(3):530-535.
Diamond, Jared
1992 The Third Chimpanzee: The Evolution and Future of the Human Animal. Harper Perennial, New York.
Diamond, Jared
1997 Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Society. W. W. Norton & Company, Inc, New York.
Haynes Jr., C. Vance, Richard E. Reanier, and William Barse.
1997 Dating a Paleoindian Site in the Amazon in Comparison with Clovis Culture. Science 275(5380):1948-1952.
Moore, John H. and Michael E. Moseley.
2001 How Many Frogs Does it Take to Leap Around the Americas? Comments on Anderson and Gillam. American Antiquity 66(3):526-529.
Roosevelt, A.C., da Costa, M. Lima, Machado, C. Lopes, Michab, M, et al.
1996 Paleoindian Cave Dwellers in the Amazon: The Peopling of the Americas. Science 272(5260):373-385.
Sandweiss, Daniel H., Heather McInnis, Richard L. Burger, Asuncion Cano, Bernardino Ojeda, Rolando Paredes, Maria del Carmen Sandweiss, and Michael D. Glascock.
1998 Quebrada Jaguay: Early South American Maritime Adaptations. Science 281(5384):1830-1832.
Surovell, Todd A.
2000 Early Paleoindian Woman, Children, Mobility, and Fertility. American Antiquity 65(3):493-508.
Waguespack, Nicole M.
2002 Colonization of the Americas: Disease Ecology and the Paeloindian Lifestyle. Human Ecology 30(2):227-243.
Thursday, February 16, 2006
Miscellany
Perfume for Valentine's Day (for Leslie, not for me). I don't know how long I spent at that counter snorting smell after smell. I do know that when I got home I smelled pretty strange. Perhaps I don't have a sophisticated sniffer, but a lot of the expensive perfumes just plain stink.
Scuba yesterday was awesome as usual. We're using the full equipment now and doing things like sitting at the bottom of the 8 foot section, taking off our masks, swimming away for a bit, coming back, putting the mask back on (underwater), and clearing it so you can see again (also underwater). Cool stuff - but dang, is it cold just sitting there underwater!
Speaking of swimming...Looks like I'll be swimming in the local master's meet again this year. It will be on April 1st (no, this is not an April Fools joke). I have no idea what I want to swim. I'll probably do all the 50s or the 100s and maybe a long distance event as well.
Sleep has been fleeting lately. I blame poker. I've been playing a lot online - not with real money, of course - and it constantly reminds me why. I get lucky every now and then, but for the most part I'm pretty terrible at it. Which I suppose is a good thing - it keeps me out of the casinos. I don't figure I'll be playing for much longer. It's mildly fun, but losing its appeal rapidly. Just doesn't do much for me.
School is school. I'll be glad to leave.
Kids are doing good...generally. This past month Mary has started throwing some major attitude towards Leslie. She feels sorry afterwards and says she doesn't know how to act differently. It's a learning process and from what I know about her, it is probably just as hard on her as it is on Leslie. You want your kids to grow up to be nice people, but sometimes it is hard to figure out what you have to do now in order for that to happen. Parenting sure has its ups and downs, and I'm trying not to let it stress me out.
Scuba yesterday was awesome as usual. We're using the full equipment now and doing things like sitting at the bottom of the 8 foot section, taking off our masks, swimming away for a bit, coming back, putting the mask back on (underwater), and clearing it so you can see again (also underwater). Cool stuff - but dang, is it cold just sitting there underwater!
Speaking of swimming...Looks like I'll be swimming in the local master's meet again this year. It will be on April 1st (no, this is not an April Fools joke). I have no idea what I want to swim. I'll probably do all the 50s or the 100s and maybe a long distance event as well.
Sleep has been fleeting lately. I blame poker. I've been playing a lot online - not with real money, of course - and it constantly reminds me why. I get lucky every now and then, but for the most part I'm pretty terrible at it. Which I suppose is a good thing - it keeps me out of the casinos. I don't figure I'll be playing for much longer. It's mildly fun, but losing its appeal rapidly. Just doesn't do much for me.
School is school. I'll be glad to leave.
Kids are doing good...generally. This past month Mary has started throwing some major attitude towards Leslie. She feels sorry afterwards and says she doesn't know how to act differently. It's a learning process and from what I know about her, it is probably just as hard on her as it is on Leslie. You want your kids to grow up to be nice people, but sometimes it is hard to figure out what you have to do now in order for that to happen. Parenting sure has its ups and downs, and I'm trying not to let it stress me out.
Tuesday, February 14, 2006
What's Up With That?
A few things today. First, a rant. Why on earth is the Olympics broadcasted so stinkin' late at night?! I don't mind watching, but when I have to stay up until midnight in the hopes I might see something of interest (instead of yet ANOTHER athelete get seriously injured). Which brings up another thing: Why oh why don't the TV stations show a wider range of events? I mean, I have to believe that figure skating and half-pipe snowboarding aren't the only things going on. Come on! Show us some variety!
Second thing: Dad is in the hospital. Again. This time, the infinite wisdom of the doctors can't decide if it is the flu or his gall bladder. When I got the call last night, I was sure it was going to be much worse news than that. Still, you're in our prayers, Dad...and don't let those nurses give you any crap!
Second thing: Dad is in the hospital. Again. This time, the infinite wisdom of the doctors can't decide if it is the flu or his gall bladder. When I got the call last night, I was sure it was going to be much worse news than that. Still, you're in our prayers, Dad...and don't let those nurses give you any crap!
Friday, February 10, 2006
Only a Dad
Came across this poem today and I'd thought I'd share:
Perhaps I am being overly sentimental. My life has been incredibly busy lately - mostly with (once again) trying to determine what I want to be when I grow up. What will my role be in society? Will I make a difference? Will I be happy in a world of distractions and disappointments?
Over the past several years, I have held a philosophy that may or may not be shared with others: When things are a mess, refocus on the basics. It has worked extremely well at work, and I realize it is what I have been (unconciously?) doing for the past few weeks. My point being this: I am a father. It is what I am, it is who I am, it is what I want to be. All the rest is just "chrome" on the car of life - pretty to look at, but ultimately non-functional.
The unspoken (unwritten) foundation for that previous paragraph is that I also want to be a husband. Leslie and I were talking last night about how nice it is to be such good friends that while their might be times we don't spend as much time with each other as we'd like, we will always be there when the time is right. I love my wife more than I can conceivably put into words. Sure, there are those times when I get grumpy (more often than I should) or she gets irritated with me (not nearly as much as she has a right to). But I know that after I ride in on my white horse to rescue her from a dragon, we can ride off together in the same saddle towards the next adventure where she will most likely rescue me from the next dragon to come along. We're a team, we're in love, and no matter what life throws at us, I know she's "got my back."
Yup, it's back to basics for me. And the basics = my family.
Only a Dad
… But the Best of Men.
Only a dad, with a tired face,
Coming home from the daily race;
Bringing little of gold and fame
To show how well he has played the game,
But glad in his heart that his own rejoice
To see him come home and to hear his voice.
Only a dad, of a brood of four,
One of ten million men or more,
Plodding along in the daily strife,
Bearing the whips and scorns of life
With never a whimper of pain or hate,
For the sake of those who at home await.
Only a dad, neither rich nor proud,
Merely one of the surging crowd,
Toiling, striving, from day to day,
Facing whatever may come his way;
Silent, whenever the harsh condemn,
And bearing it all for the love of them.
Only a dad, but he gives his all
To smooth the way for his children small;
Doing, with courage stern and grim,
The deeds that his father did for him.
These are the lines that for him I pen;
Only a dad, but the best of men.
(Author Unknown. Source Book of Poetry, Al Bryant, comp.; Grand Rapids, Zondewan Publishing House, 1968.)
Perhaps I am being overly sentimental. My life has been incredibly busy lately - mostly with (once again) trying to determine what I want to be when I grow up. What will my role be in society? Will I make a difference? Will I be happy in a world of distractions and disappointments?
Over the past several years, I have held a philosophy that may or may not be shared with others: When things are a mess, refocus on the basics. It has worked extremely well at work, and I realize it is what I have been (unconciously?) doing for the past few weeks. My point being this: I am a father. It is what I am, it is who I am, it is what I want to be. All the rest is just "chrome" on the car of life - pretty to look at, but ultimately non-functional.
The unspoken (unwritten) foundation for that previous paragraph is that I also want to be a husband. Leslie and I were talking last night about how nice it is to be such good friends that while their might be times we don't spend as much time with each other as we'd like, we will always be there when the time is right. I love my wife more than I can conceivably put into words. Sure, there are those times when I get grumpy (more often than I should) or she gets irritated with me (not nearly as much as she has a right to). But I know that after I ride in on my white horse to rescue her from a dragon, we can ride off together in the same saddle towards the next adventure where she will most likely rescue me from the next dragon to come along. We're a team, we're in love, and no matter what life throws at us, I know she's "got my back."
Yup, it's back to basics for me. And the basics = my family.
Wednesday, February 08, 2006
Tuesday, February 07, 2006
Off Kilter
Ever have one of those days/weeks/months that just seems...off...somehow? That is what today was like. I got up, went to work, swam 1700 yards, went to class, came home, slept for 3+ hours, woke up and watched Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (one of my favorites) and now I'm just sitting looking blankly at the computer screen as it nears 10PM.
Part of it has to do with some papers for class that I've been procrastinating - one on comparing paleoindian cultures in North and South America, and the other on a book titled The Third Chimpanzee by Jared Diamond. Both are actually very interesting, but it just adds to my mood...now if I can just figure out what my mood is...
Speaking of Jared Diamond, he has become one of my favorite non-fiction authors lately. Three of his books in particular have really caught my attention and I just love the way he writes.
The Third Chimpanzee
Guns, Germs, and Steel
and Collapse: How Societies Choose to Succeed or Fail
All three are excellent books on human behavior/culture. Makes me wish I had time to write a book myself.
Part of it has to do with some papers for class that I've been procrastinating - one on comparing paleoindian cultures in North and South America, and the other on a book titled The Third Chimpanzee by Jared Diamond. Both are actually very interesting, but it just adds to my mood...now if I can just figure out what my mood is...
Speaking of Jared Diamond, he has become one of my favorite non-fiction authors lately. Three of his books in particular have really caught my attention and I just love the way he writes.
The Third Chimpanzee
Guns, Germs, and Steel
and Collapse: How Societies Choose to Succeed or Fail
All three are excellent books on human behavior/culture. Makes me wish I had time to write a book myself.
Monday, February 06, 2006
Superbowl - Superblah
I didn't watch the whole Superbowl, since I'm not a big football fan. However, what I did watch did nothing but mildly irritate me. The Seahawks got shafted by absolutely terrible calls by the refs. That and you never knew from one play to the next if that one receiver (Stevens?) was going to catch the stupid ball or not. I'm just glad I was watching it by myself. I couldn't have handled watching it with rabid sports fans. All in all, I don't think the Steelers won the game as much as the Seahawks lost it. Meh. I'm over it.
(P.S. And the commercials were crappy. Seriously. Not a single good one.)
(P.S. And the commercials were crappy. Seriously. Not a single good one.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
