there is a Christian K-12 school in the kansas city area that doesn't host school dances (to avoid pointing fingers, we'll call it something generic like Kansas City Christian School). it doesn't have a homecoming dance - it has a winter banquet instead. growing up i always thought that was ridiculous, and now that i'm grown - i still do.
in a related story, the NY Times threw out this article a few days ago. i found it to be a perfect blend of relief and humor...much like Preparation H. it is especially comforting for those of us who are hosting a dance party tomorrow night...
hilarious section on page 1: "They are opting to allow formal dances, like swing or ballroom. Of course, it’s unlikely there will be hip-hop or bump-and-grind at J.B.U. They will not be krumping."
give it a read.
-ap.
January 31, 2007
james earl jones
james earl jones, the voice of darth vader, has unarguably the most hardcore voice in the history of mankind. sometimes when i pray, i like to think of God's voice back to me in the form of james earl jones'. **
anyways. someone awesome has taken clips from Star Wars Episode IV and dubbed over vader's voice with JEJ quotes from his other various movies (field of dreams, the lion king (mufasa), patriot games, the hunt for red october, and many others).
too bad they didnt use any from the lion king. i was really hoping for "simba..." or "everything the light touches..." or "you deliberately disobeyed me...and whats worse, you put nala in danger!"
-ap.
** - gasp! how blasphemous!
snakes on a plane
wow. i don't even know what to say. i mean seriously.this movie was all sorts of terrible. i mean ALL sorts. we're talking meaningless plot, unnecessary love, horrendous dialogue, ridiculous deaths, ill-tempered serpents, and illogical everything. oh, and a snake chomping a girl's boob.
...but it was great.
however, i can't actually do a review of it - that would be too serious - and this movie was way too off its donker. and i'm lazy. so thats really it.
-ap.
January 29, 2007
intentionality.
this time three years ago i would have described myself as someone who knew everyone and no one simultaneously - and by that i mean i was acquainted with everyone but only knew a select few on an intimate level. and i was happy with that life.
this time a year ago i decided to change that. i had decided that life isn't about how many people you know but about how intimately you know the people you know. i only counted about five people who fit in the latter category. so i attempted to change. i quit worrying about meeting everyone and focused putting time and effort into the relationships i'd already begun. intentionality is what i called it. having purpose and direction with each of my friends.
and here i am a year later, for the first time ever, disliking my life.
okay. maybe that is a stretch. i don't dislike my life, but i certainly don't love it. there is something wrong with that outcome. something went wrong in the switch apparently. i do know a handful of people extremely well, but i don't know anyone beyond that. isn't it supposed to be a positively life altering thing to gain so many meaningful friendships? i am not nearly as joyful as i used to be. i've become very serious and, at times, very antisocial. seriousness can be good, and i think it takes a great deal of seriousness to be intentional with one another, but there has to be more to this intentionality than i've gained in the past year or so.
and then i go home to kc for the weekend and go to church and hear the sermon i heard. apparently they're in the middle of a series called just walk across the room - it is, from what i gathered yesterday, a series devoted to learning how to leave your comfort zone and 'walk across the room' to get to know others. WHAT. that was my LIFE two years ago. i absolutely loved being able to talk with anyone and everyone. meeting new people and saying 'hi' to everyone brought me the utmost joy and my life reflected that.
so i got excited. this is the life i knew and loved. i'd heard this word 'intentionality' and immediately associated it with seriously heavy conversations - insightful and knowledge-filled, but with very little laughter.it was being social without being silly. i'd changed my lifestyle from being a jovial and light-hearted to being serious and, well, no fun. who wants to be intentional about that? anyone who has a choice will pick fun over its alternative. i mean come on. but this isn't at all true. the answer isn't that one life is better than the other; it is in someplace i'd failed to look.
the truth: intention must coincide with God.
what i've realized since yesterday morning is that there is a difference between living intentionally and living intentionally for God. i can try as hard as i can to be sincere and get to know others, but if my motivation is just because i'm trying to live intentionally then what is the use? my motivation needs to be God-centered. only through Christ can we truly be intentional.
i was trying to be intentional for being intentional's sake, and that is why the endeavor has offered limited fruit. not because it is a crappier lifestyle, but because i've been living it crappier. (the use of crappier in both cases is due to the fact that it is a simple way to give it negative connotations without really describing or defining it at all.)
God was the motivation behind meeting other people, but God did not factor into the equation when it came to getting to know people on a deeper more spiritual level. why can't i simply be intentional in both my conversations and in my ability to know everyone?
exciting realization: if God is my motivation i can do both. i don't need to ditch my old ways of leaving my comfort bubble to meet others. i can keep that and simply dive into deeper relationships with the people i meet. i could meet everyone and then get to know everyone.
oh, it's on.
-ap.
this time a year ago i decided to change that. i had decided that life isn't about how many people you know but about how intimately you know the people you know. i only counted about five people who fit in the latter category. so i attempted to change. i quit worrying about meeting everyone and focused putting time and effort into the relationships i'd already begun. intentionality is what i called it. having purpose and direction with each of my friends.
and here i am a year later, for the first time ever, disliking my life.
okay. maybe that is a stretch. i don't dislike my life, but i certainly don't love it. there is something wrong with that outcome. something went wrong in the switch apparently. i do know a handful of people extremely well, but i don't know anyone beyond that. isn't it supposed to be a positively life altering thing to gain so many meaningful friendships? i am not nearly as joyful as i used to be. i've become very serious and, at times, very antisocial. seriousness can be good, and i think it takes a great deal of seriousness to be intentional with one another, but there has to be more to this intentionality than i've gained in the past year or so.
and then i go home to kc for the weekend and go to church and hear the sermon i heard. apparently they're in the middle of a series called just walk across the room - it is, from what i gathered yesterday, a series devoted to learning how to leave your comfort zone and 'walk across the room' to get to know others. WHAT. that was my LIFE two years ago. i absolutely loved being able to talk with anyone and everyone. meeting new people and saying 'hi' to everyone brought me the utmost joy and my life reflected that.
so i got excited. this is the life i knew and loved. i'd heard this word 'intentionality' and immediately associated it with seriously heavy conversations - insightful and knowledge-filled, but with very little laughter.it was being social without being silly. i'd changed my lifestyle from being a jovial and light-hearted to being serious and, well, no fun. who wants to be intentional about that? anyone who has a choice will pick fun over its alternative. i mean come on. but this isn't at all true. the answer isn't that one life is better than the other; it is in someplace i'd failed to look.
the truth: intention must coincide with God.
what i've realized since yesterday morning is that there is a difference between living intentionally and living intentionally for God. i can try as hard as i can to be sincere and get to know others, but if my motivation is just because i'm trying to live intentionally then what is the use? my motivation needs to be God-centered. only through Christ can we truly be intentional.
i was trying to be intentional for being intentional's sake, and that is why the endeavor has offered limited fruit. not because it is a crappier lifestyle, but because i've been living it crappier. (the use of crappier in both cases is due to the fact that it is a simple way to give it negative connotations without really describing or defining it at all.)
God was the motivation behind meeting other people, but God did not factor into the equation when it came to getting to know people on a deeper more spiritual level. why can't i simply be intentional in both my conversations and in my ability to know everyone?
exciting realization: if God is my motivation i can do both. i don't need to ditch my old ways of leaving my comfort bubble to meet others. i can keep that and simply dive into deeper relationships with the people i meet. i could meet everyone and then get to know everyone.
oh, it's on.
-ap.
January 27, 2007
my parents' house
so i'm sitting at home in kc eating a kit-kat bar that i found secretly stashed in a glass canister in my family's pantry. i'm listening to "I Am the Walrus" via my pink mini iPod. When i finish my kit-kat i plan to venture back to the pantry in hopes of finding other fantastic treats i can't afford to buy myself when i'm in Manhattan. one of the perks of coming home: eat like royalty for a few days.
however, the prince's chambers are apparently being taken over by the king's need for an office. yes, my friends, as of tomorrow evening i officially do not have a bedroom at my home in OP. i think that means i officially have to refer to this house as "my parents' house." what a strange and unexpected step in the maturation cycle. weird. i don't have a room here anymore. Manhattan is not my home; i refuse to let that happen. but circumstances being what they are - dangit. it is. heartbreak. ("Yesterday" just started coursing through these little white buds - how perfect.)
it is only for another two years maximum though. i graduate in spring 09 at the very very latest - december 08 if i work my skinny rear off between now and then. seeing that i'm an awful student makes me feel like spring 09 is a more accurate estimate. phooey. eh, i'll survive.
at least i get to live in other places during the summers (hopefully). i filled out my SEVENTEEN page application to Peninsula Covenant Church today. now all i have to do is throw down a couple references, get them the paperwork, make a 10-15 minute video of myself and send everything to them out in the San Fran area. man i hope i get this job. California? seeeeerious donk sauce. who needs a home in overland park (the midwest at all for that matter) when you're living down the street from the beach all summer? holla.
but i'll miss it. my mom and i are clearing out the entire thing tomorrow. i haven't taken anything out of my closet since i was in middle school - maybe i'll find something great. like a phat check. or some long lost tshirts. or a maybe like a brontosaurus. that'd be off the chains. or my Ninja Turtles action figures (they're in there, but i know precisely where they are). regardless. it is probably going to be somewhat bittersweet.
anyway. i thought i'd lament. that word can be used as a verb too right? i like to think that i'm remotely eloquent, but sometimes i question myself - sometimes i even make up phrases that mean nothing in general. i'm trying to enhance my vocabulary though. someday i hope to use the word "nebulous". preferably in a staff meeting of sorts.
-ap.
however, the prince's chambers are apparently being taken over by the king's need for an office. yes, my friends, as of tomorrow evening i officially do not have a bedroom at my home in OP. i think that means i officially have to refer to this house as "my parents' house." what a strange and unexpected step in the maturation cycle. weird. i don't have a room here anymore. Manhattan is not my home; i refuse to let that happen. but circumstances being what they are - dangit. it is. heartbreak. ("Yesterday" just started coursing through these little white buds - how perfect.)
it is only for another two years maximum though. i graduate in spring 09 at the very very latest - december 08 if i work my skinny rear off between now and then. seeing that i'm an awful student makes me feel like spring 09 is a more accurate estimate. phooey. eh, i'll survive.
at least i get to live in other places during the summers (hopefully). i filled out my SEVENTEEN page application to Peninsula Covenant Church today. now all i have to do is throw down a couple references, get them the paperwork, make a 10-15 minute video of myself and send everything to them out in the San Fran area. man i hope i get this job. California? seeeeerious donk sauce. who needs a home in overland park (the midwest at all for that matter) when you're living down the street from the beach all summer? holla.
but i'll miss it. my mom and i are clearing out the entire thing tomorrow. i haven't taken anything out of my closet since i was in middle school - maybe i'll find something great. like a phat check. or some long lost tshirts. or a maybe like a brontosaurus. that'd be off the chains. or my Ninja Turtles action figures (they're in there, but i know precisely where they are). regardless. it is probably going to be somewhat bittersweet.
anyway. i thought i'd lament. that word can be used as a verb too right? i like to think that i'm remotely eloquent, but sometimes i question myself - sometimes i even make up phrases that mean nothing in general. i'm trying to enhance my vocabulary though. someday i hope to use the word "nebulous". preferably in a staff meeting of sorts.
-ap.
January 25, 2007
The Trump Suit
In a certain card game, one of the hands dealt contains:
1. Exactly thirteen cards.
2. At least one card in each of four suits - spades, hearts, diamonds, clubs.
3. A different number of cards in each suit.
4. A total of five hearts and diamonds.
5. A total of six hearts and spades.
6. Exactly two cards in the "trump" suit.
Which one of the four suits is the "trump" suit?
1. Exactly thirteen cards.
2. At least one card in each of four suits - spades, hearts, diamonds, clubs.
3. A different number of cards in each suit.
4. A total of five hearts and diamonds.
5. A total of six hearts and spades.
6. Exactly two cards in the "trump" suit.
Which one of the four suits is the "trump" suit?
January 23, 2007
oh mandy.
my roommates, being the observant and understanding roommates that they are, are fully aware of my love for this woman. usually i would say that celebrity crushes are ridiculous. i will concede, however, that they're perfectly alright if they are my celebrity crush. i would in no way make fun of anyone who owned and watched Chasing Liberty alone from time to time, nor would you i hope. perfectly normal and totally understandable.my roommate, john, agreeing with me in this outlook, did not hesitate to share with me this article.
it is a rather bittersweet article for me to be honest. depression sucks. especially when it is mandy moore, and being the caring and loving individual i am i wish i could do something about it. i would gladly be there to wipe away mandy's tears if need be. however, the mix-match of emotions ensues here when i realize that my motivation for tear-wiping is undoubtedly ignited due to a heightened level of excitement seeing that she is single. now is the moment when i come in and sweep her off her feet in her ever-so-vulnerable state. yes. how adorable.
and the day is mine.
and mandy, if you happen to be reading this, i can understand if you're ultra-creeped out. i would be too. granted you're probably used to this sort of thing. you undoubtedly have some serious fan admiration that i undoubtedly lack largely due to four key facts:
1. you're a famous actress.
2. you're a famous musician.
3. you're gorgeous (see photo).
4. and i am none of those things.
ps. feel free to leave your number. i'm very single.
-ap.
thoughts on prayer.
confession: prayer can sometimes be obnoxious.
the way i figure it, worship should be a lifestyle, we can all agree on this i think. nowadays people hear "worship" and immediately think "music". that is a form, yes, but worship is a way of life; it is an every moment of every day affair, not just when some guy stands in front of a congregation and starts playing "God of Wonders". i think most people have heard that view and idea before. its not a new one.
but this isn't about worship. its about prayer. the way i figure it, prayer should be a lifestyle as well. i think prayer, just like worship, has become ritual. we pray before meals. we pray before bed. we pray before, during, and after church services. some Christian schools pray before each class period. but why? do we do it because we are in complete reverence and communication with God? or do we do it because we must? what is our motivation for prayers like these? is it holy or is it ritual?
sometimes in community prayer i feel like people (myself not excluded) try their hardest to use eloquent language and coat their conversation with God with some sort of candied church language. i also sometimes feel a great deal of pressure to pray at times when i don't truly feel led to pray. think back to the last time you heard the phrase, "does someone want to pray to close?" thus begins the 5 to 10 second awkward pause (depending on how patient the crowd is) until finally someone offers themselves to take one for the team. why do we do this? why do we require ourselves to pray in certain settings? i can't stand forced prayer. there is little or no reverence in it and God certainly doesn't need it. He deserves it, but he doesn't need it. it isn't as if God doesn't like it when we force one up to Him, but does he want them?
psalm 50.
7 -15 "Are you listening, dear people? I'm getting ready to speak;
Israel, I'm about ready to bring you to trial.
This is God, your God,
speaking to you.
I don't find fault with your acts of worship,
the frequent burnt sacrifices you offer.
But why should I want your blue-ribbon bull,
or more and more goats from your herds?
Every creature in the forest is mine,
the wild animals on all the mountains.
I know every mountain bird by name;
the scampering field mice are my friends.
If I get hungry, do you think I'd tell you?
All creation and its bounty are mine.
Do you think I feast on venison?
or drink draughts of goats' blood?
Spread for me a banquet of praise,
serve High God a feast of kept promises,
And call for help when you're in trouble—
I'll help you, and you'll honor me."
what want would He have for our offerings? what desire? he knows our thoughts, is there any need for us to lift up illegitimate prayers his way? he doesn't rebuke them, but He doesn't delight in them. what He does delight in is banquets of praise. banquets! are these pre-dinner/pre-church/pre-meal/pre-class prayers coming in banquet form? i'd consider them a light snack...maybe. like you're giving him half a grape or something like one Lay's potato chip. betcha can' t eat just one, but betcha like to tease God with one of them and don't offer up any more. He desires and deserves much more: banquets. a Thanksgiving dinner's worth of prayer. imagine the scene from the first harry potter movie when Dumbledore casts his food o' plenty spell and 900 different steaming plates of glitzy meats appear on 4 football field length tables for all the kids to devour. that should be our prayers to God. that is what delights in and that is what He desires.
we also can honor God when we call out to him. when we're at the end of our rope and we scream out to God for help, he not only helps us, but we honor him when we search for him. he loves it when we need Him, we honor Him when we look to Him for assistance and He is anxious for us to need Him. heartfelt and honest prayers directly from the soul - he doesn't want candied churchese prayers; he wants outcries. honest. painful. legitimate. gut wrenching. He is there and He is overjoyed when we want Him as much as he wants us.
prayer (and worship as well) has become ritual, desensitized and rarely sacred. application? maybe it is making prayer a constant part of our lives. maybe it is humbling ourselves and needing God at all times and holding a continuous conversation with Him every single day. maybe, instead of having the occasional "Big-Gulps-esque" conversations with Him, we make it an all day affair; when we wake up in the morning we say something like, "sup God?." and then we end our day with, "welp. talk to you in the morning." that doesn't leave room for half-a-grape prayers. it is a lifestyle, just like worship.
1 Thessalonians 5:17 - "pray without ceasing."
every moment. every day. never stop. pray without ceasing.
so...does someone want to pray to keep us going?...........k thanks.
-ap.
the way i figure it, worship should be a lifestyle, we can all agree on this i think. nowadays people hear "worship" and immediately think "music". that is a form, yes, but worship is a way of life; it is an every moment of every day affair, not just when some guy stands in front of a congregation and starts playing "God of Wonders". i think most people have heard that view and idea before. its not a new one.
but this isn't about worship. its about prayer. the way i figure it, prayer should be a lifestyle as well. i think prayer, just like worship, has become ritual. we pray before meals. we pray before bed. we pray before, during, and after church services. some Christian schools pray before each class period. but why? do we do it because we are in complete reverence and communication with God? or do we do it because we must? what is our motivation for prayers like these? is it holy or is it ritual?
sometimes in community prayer i feel like people (myself not excluded) try their hardest to use eloquent language and coat their conversation with God with some sort of candied church language. i also sometimes feel a great deal of pressure to pray at times when i don't truly feel led to pray. think back to the last time you heard the phrase, "does someone want to pray to close?" thus begins the 5 to 10 second awkward pause (depending on how patient the crowd is) until finally someone offers themselves to take one for the team. why do we do this? why do we require ourselves to pray in certain settings? i can't stand forced prayer. there is little or no reverence in it and God certainly doesn't need it. He deserves it, but he doesn't need it. it isn't as if God doesn't like it when we force one up to Him, but does he want them?
psalm 50.
7 -15 "Are you listening, dear people? I'm getting ready to speak;
Israel, I'm about ready to bring you to trial.
This is God, your God,
speaking to you.
I don't find fault with your acts of worship,
the frequent burnt sacrifices you offer.
But why should I want your blue-ribbon bull,
or more and more goats from your herds?
Every creature in the forest is mine,
the wild animals on all the mountains.
I know every mountain bird by name;
the scampering field mice are my friends.
If I get hungry, do you think I'd tell you?
All creation and its bounty are mine.
Do you think I feast on venison?
or drink draughts of goats' blood?
Spread for me a banquet of praise,
serve High God a feast of kept promises,
And call for help when you're in trouble—
I'll help you, and you'll honor me."
what want would He have for our offerings? what desire? he knows our thoughts, is there any need for us to lift up illegitimate prayers his way? he doesn't rebuke them, but He doesn't delight in them. what He does delight in is banquets of praise. banquets! are these pre-dinner/pre-church/pre-meal/pre-class prayers coming in banquet form? i'd consider them a light snack...maybe. like you're giving him half a grape or something like one Lay's potato chip. betcha can' t eat just one, but betcha like to tease God with one of them and don't offer up any more. He desires and deserves much more: banquets. a Thanksgiving dinner's worth of prayer. imagine the scene from the first harry potter movie when Dumbledore casts his food o' plenty spell and 900 different steaming plates of glitzy meats appear on 4 football field length tables for all the kids to devour. that should be our prayers to God. that is what delights in and that is what He desires.
we also can honor God when we call out to him. when we're at the end of our rope and we scream out to God for help, he not only helps us, but we honor him when we search for him. he loves it when we need Him, we honor Him when we look to Him for assistance and He is anxious for us to need Him. heartfelt and honest prayers directly from the soul - he doesn't want candied churchese prayers; he wants outcries. honest. painful. legitimate. gut wrenching. He is there and He is overjoyed when we want Him as much as he wants us.
prayer (and worship as well) has become ritual, desensitized and rarely sacred. application? maybe it is making prayer a constant part of our lives. maybe it is humbling ourselves and needing God at all times and holding a continuous conversation with Him every single day. maybe, instead of having the occasional "Big-Gulps-esque" conversations with Him, we make it an all day affair; when we wake up in the morning we say something like, "sup God?." and then we end our day with, "welp. talk to you in the morning." that doesn't leave room for half-a-grape prayers. it is a lifestyle, just like worship.
1 Thessalonians 5:17 - "pray without ceasing."
every moment. every day. never stop. pray without ceasing.
so...does someone want to pray to keep us going?...........k thanks.
-ap.
January 22, 2007
knowledge vs college
i have recently (within the last year or so) come to appreciate magazines. newspapers, though handy for their sense of urgency and directness, can typically be poorly written and uninteresting due to the fact that they are produced daily. books, though thorough, just eat up so much time and can occasionally become rather monotonous. magazines, i have found combines the best of both media: they're to the point, yet since their turnover time between issues is usually multiple weeks, they are typically very well written.
i'm a current subscriber to Relevant magazine and Sports Illustrated (really i just get SI so i can read Rick Reilly and look at the pictures; i get all the sports coverage i need from espn.com usually). anyway. they keep me occupied enough for now. eventually i plan to get Newsweek and some sort of music magazine, i haven't decided which one i want to get - maybe Rolling Stone.
magazines (along with a great deal of books) are where i've gotten a great deal of my knowledge from in the last handful of months. i'm learning a lot about the world, as well as about my life. along with personal experience and through conversations with friends and family, i've probably gained the most knowledge as of late from magazines.
however, i'm sorry to say, since i've gotten back to school and into more difficult and time consuming courses, my magazine time has diminished greatly. which is unfortunate, because i'm at school to learn, yet in reality it seems to be hindering my ability to do so. sure i'm finding out a bunch about philosophy and religion and anthropolgy and such, but as far as personal growth goes, i feel like i'm floundering. maybe it has just been a dry first few weeks (which i doubt), but i honestly feel like i learn less when school is in session than i do on my own. i'm currently in the middle of four books right now for my classes, however, i just spent the last hour thumbing through Relevant and i picked up more thoughts and ideas to wrestle with than i have in all of my books thus far.
i guess the main difference is the fact that when i'm looking through magazines or picking out books to read i'm doing so because it is something that i want to wrestle with and because it is something i want to figure out. gaining knowledge about The Faiths of the Founding Fathers, while interesting, isn't anything i'm anxious to add to my life.
heartbreak hotel.
anyways. i guess sometimes i wonder why i'm in school at all. knowledge? no. i just want a piece of paper.
sigh. what a lame direction.
-ap.
i'm a current subscriber to Relevant magazine and Sports Illustrated (really i just get SI so i can read Rick Reilly and look at the pictures; i get all the sports coverage i need from espn.com usually). anyway. they keep me occupied enough for now. eventually i plan to get Newsweek and some sort of music magazine, i haven't decided which one i want to get - maybe Rolling Stone.
magazines (along with a great deal of books) are where i've gotten a great deal of my knowledge from in the last handful of months. i'm learning a lot about the world, as well as about my life. along with personal experience and through conversations with friends and family, i've probably gained the most knowledge as of late from magazines.
however, i'm sorry to say, since i've gotten back to school and into more difficult and time consuming courses, my magazine time has diminished greatly. which is unfortunate, because i'm at school to learn, yet in reality it seems to be hindering my ability to do so. sure i'm finding out a bunch about philosophy and religion and anthropolgy and such, but as far as personal growth goes, i feel like i'm floundering. maybe it has just been a dry first few weeks (which i doubt), but i honestly feel like i learn less when school is in session than i do on my own. i'm currently in the middle of four books right now for my classes, however, i just spent the last hour thumbing through Relevant and i picked up more thoughts and ideas to wrestle with than i have in all of my books thus far.
i guess the main difference is the fact that when i'm looking through magazines or picking out books to read i'm doing so because it is something that i want to wrestle with and because it is something i want to figure out. gaining knowledge about The Faiths of the Founding Fathers, while interesting, isn't anything i'm anxious to add to my life.
heartbreak hotel.
anyways. i guess sometimes i wonder why i'm in school at all. knowledge? no. i just want a piece of paper.
sigh. what a lame direction.
-ap.
January 21, 2007
snow in manhattan.
before i say anything else, i need to mention the following: manhattan plowing is absolutely pitiful. they drive the plows in a straight line up and back each major street...and thats it. so every main road has a stripe of snow between lanes, and not a single residential street is plowed whatsoever. and it's not like manhattan residential roads are a cake walk to drive on just normally - little apple? more like little grand canyon on some of our streets. its like driving on that little kiddie roller coaster at Worlds of Fun, the 'Caterpillar'. ridiculous.
but this doesn't pose a serious issue to me seeing that i haven't driven my car since last wednesday. out of gas, covered in snow and ice, and out of money to refill my tank. good thing manhattan is small enough that i can walk anywhere i need to go.
we got about 7 inches today and it is still falling. my roommates and i spent about 2 hours outside throwing snowballs in it today, and we have plans to mess around in it tomorrow afternoon too. i'm pretty excited - we're looking to have a serious match up. we're going to build rival snow forts and everything. talk about great.
but for now i need to get to sleep - i've got Bedside Baptist in the morning.
late.
-ap.
but this doesn't pose a serious issue to me seeing that i haven't driven my car since last wednesday. out of gas, covered in snow and ice, and out of money to refill my tank. good thing manhattan is small enough that i can walk anywhere i need to go.
we got about 7 inches today and it is still falling. my roommates and i spent about 2 hours outside throwing snowballs in it today, and we have plans to mess around in it tomorrow afternoon too. i'm pretty excited - we're looking to have a serious match up. we're going to build rival snow forts and everything. talk about great.
but for now i need to get to sleep - i've got Bedside Baptist in the morning.
late.
-ap.
January 18, 2007
utilizing the asterisk.
apparently more people read this little cutie than i thought. cause the subtle counter i added to this deal the other day is already nearing 1000 hits.
holler at cha boi.
i'm in the union on campus right now in the cleverly named "union station" coffee shop in the lower level. i have a two hour break between modern philosophy and religion in american history, and i needed to book a flight to Denver online. so here i am on a computer. how convenient. might as well throw down something.
last night i went to the kstate/baylor basketball game. it was a much closer game than it probably should have been - the officiating was rather sketch. i don't typically like to blame anything on referees - if a game comes down to officiating then there are many things a team could have done differently to win. officiating probably shouldn't determine an outcome. unless it is the oklahoma/oregon football game and then i will admit, OU got screwed*.
the boo's last night were quite possibly the loudest I've ever heard at a sporting event, and by the sound of it, they were quite audible on the television as well. three consecutive trips down the court kstate got called for fouls that were questionable in the least, and on the three ensuing kstate possessions there were strong cases for a foul to be called and there was no whistle whatsoever. while one of the baylor dudes (Aaron Bruce** to be specific) was shooting free throws the booing was absolutely deafening, and of course the moment he shot and made the FT all teh booing simultaneously silenced for a moment - just long enough for Bob Huggins to be the only person in the entire stadium saying anything - and he was yelling at the top of his lungs. gotta love Huggie.
we won regardless, 69-60, but during the heart of the second half there was quite a bit to be frustrated about.
something i need to get off my chest: between you and me (and the entire world, i guess, seeing that this is posted publicly on the internet) Willie the Wildcat is a stupid mascot. the girls swoon over him***, but i personally find him to be all sorts of lame. the "football Willie" is alright cause at least he dons a decent uniform, but "basketball Willie" looks really silly. shorts and a sleeveless jersy with a big cat head on. serious weaksauce. and while i'm on the subject: i also am very tired of the color purple. don't get me wrong, this is a terrific university, but when you graduate as a Blue Valley Northwest Husky (also purple) and then come to KSU, you can't help but be kind of sick of the hue.
anyways. thats what is on my mind right now as i sit here on campus waiting for 3:55 to roll around. what a stupid time for a class. 3:55 to 5:10. whatev.
-ap.*!
* - but it was absolutely hilarious.
** - who rocks a faux hawk and two first names.
*** - see Kansas State Facebook group "Willie the Wildcat is the sexiest mascot ever!" which boasts 880 members.
*! - big fan of the asterisk notation in this mug.
holler at cha boi.
i'm in the union on campus right now in the cleverly named "union station" coffee shop in the lower level. i have a two hour break between modern philosophy and religion in american history, and i needed to book a flight to Denver online. so here i am on a computer. how convenient. might as well throw down something.
last night i went to the kstate/baylor basketball game. it was a much closer game than it probably should have been - the officiating was rather sketch. i don't typically like to blame anything on referees - if a game comes down to officiating then there are many things a team could have done differently to win. officiating probably shouldn't determine an outcome. unless it is the oklahoma/oregon football game and then i will admit, OU got screwed*.
the boo's last night were quite possibly the loudest I've ever heard at a sporting event, and by the sound of it, they were quite audible on the television as well. three consecutive trips down the court kstate got called for fouls that were questionable in the least, and on the three ensuing kstate possessions there were strong cases for a foul to be called and there was no whistle whatsoever. while one of the baylor dudes (Aaron Bruce** to be specific) was shooting free throws the booing was absolutely deafening, and of course the moment he shot and made the FT all teh booing simultaneously silenced for a moment - just long enough for Bob Huggins to be the only person in the entire stadium saying anything - and he was yelling at the top of his lungs. gotta love Huggie.
we won regardless, 69-60, but during the heart of the second half there was quite a bit to be frustrated about.
something i need to get off my chest: between you and me (and the entire world, i guess, seeing that this is posted publicly on the internet) Willie the Wildcat is a stupid mascot. the girls swoon over him***, but i personally find him to be all sorts of lame. the "football Willie" is alright cause at least he dons a decent uniform, but "basketball Willie" looks really silly. shorts and a sleeveless jersy with a big cat head on. serious weaksauce. and while i'm on the subject: i also am very tired of the color purple. don't get me wrong, this is a terrific university, but when you graduate as a Blue Valley Northwest Husky (also purple) and then come to KSU, you can't help but be kind of sick of the hue.
anyways. thats what is on my mind right now as i sit here on campus waiting for 3:55 to roll around. what a stupid time for a class. 3:55 to 5:10. whatev.
-ap.*!
* - but it was absolutely hilarious.
** - who rocks a faux hawk and two first names.
*** - see Kansas State Facebook group "Willie the Wildcat is the sexiest mascot ever!" which boasts 880 members.
*! - big fan of the asterisk notation in this mug.
René Descartes: Discourse on Method
this is a short paper i had to do for my History of Modern Philosophy course. i figured i'd share.
Why does Descartes believe a monkey is like a machine?
In Part V of René Descartes' Discourse on Method he expresses his belief that the bodies of humans and animals alike are a beautifully complex networking of organs, nerves, arteries and veins which God himself has created. The fact that it was made by God makes it "incomparably better ordered and has within itself movements far more wondrous than any of those that can be invented by men."
However, Descartes proceeds to mention that he believes that while humans are unique and soul-driven, animals are remarkably like machines. He supports this logically as well as thoroughly. Descartes begins by explaining the following: we would not be able to differentiate a true monkey from a machine monkey if it had the exact bodily organization and shape of a real monkey. However, if the same were said for humans it would be undoubtedly false.
Descartes' first point is that machines are unable to piece words together as humans do in order to declare thoughts to others. Animals are made up of bones, nerves, muscles, and organs just as humans, however, though they have movement and actions, they cannot express themselves verbally. In the same way, a machine may be able to move about and function on its own, but it is unable to compile thoughts into speech. This separates "beasts" (as Descartes calls them) from human beings first and foremost. Humans have the capabilities of expressing their thoughts and ideas and animals do not.
One might argue that humans simply do not speak the same language as these beasts, but Descartes is quick to correct this rebuttal. He explains that machines can only perform based on the disposition of their parts and have no ability to develop new understandings and skills. He concedes that animals and machines can and do perform better than human beings in certain aspects of life. Cheetahs can run faster; fish are better swimmers; bears are stronger creatures, yet Descartes continues to mention that although they may have a margin of superiority in certain areas, "it is also very remarkable that they show none at all in many other actions." This is because they lack the ability to develop greater understanding beyond the abilities their organs allow. Likewise, machines make human life easier at times simply by being able to accomplish things better than a human could on their own. Descartes uses the example of a clock being able to "count the hours and measure time more accurately than we can with all our carefulness." However, a clock cannot learn and new skills beyond telling the time, nor can it adapt to new situations as humans can.
He wraps up his discourse in Part V by mentioning a third major difference between animals and humans, namely, the soul. Descartes declares that the human rational soul "can in no way be derived from the potentiality of matter." In this section, everything mentioned pertaining to the human body can be built up, that is, the human body is based upon matter such that an individual is able to enhance their body and their abilities. The soul carries no mass and is made of no matter, and is unlike the rest of the body in that sense. We as humans carry a God-given soul that no other species possesses, and it is important that we realize not only this, but also that an individual's soul, Descartes explains, is independent from her or his body and does not die when the body does. the soul is immortal.
In summery, according to René Descartes in part V of his Discourse on Method, animals are like machines. This is because animals do not possess the capability of expressing their thoughts verbally, nor are they capable of adopting a further understanding of life beyond that creature's body's disposition. Descartes also explains that this is because humans, unlike "beasts", were created by God with an immortal, yet intangible and formless, soul.
---------
there are 9 more of these little bundles of joy to come this semester. glorious.
-ap.
Why does Descartes believe a monkey is like a machine?
In Part V of René Descartes' Discourse on Method he expresses his belief that the bodies of humans and animals alike are a beautifully complex networking of organs, nerves, arteries and veins which God himself has created. The fact that it was made by God makes it "incomparably better ordered and has within itself movements far more wondrous than any of those that can be invented by men."
However, Descartes proceeds to mention that he believes that while humans are unique and soul-driven, animals are remarkably like machines. He supports this logically as well as thoroughly. Descartes begins by explaining the following: we would not be able to differentiate a true monkey from a machine monkey if it had the exact bodily organization and shape of a real monkey. However, if the same were said for humans it would be undoubtedly false.
Descartes' first point is that machines are unable to piece words together as humans do in order to declare thoughts to others. Animals are made up of bones, nerves, muscles, and organs just as humans, however, though they have movement and actions, they cannot express themselves verbally. In the same way, a machine may be able to move about and function on its own, but it is unable to compile thoughts into speech. This separates "beasts" (as Descartes calls them) from human beings first and foremost. Humans have the capabilities of expressing their thoughts and ideas and animals do not.
One might argue that humans simply do not speak the same language as these beasts, but Descartes is quick to correct this rebuttal. He explains that machines can only perform based on the disposition of their parts and have no ability to develop new understandings and skills. He concedes that animals and machines can and do perform better than human beings in certain aspects of life. Cheetahs can run faster; fish are better swimmers; bears are stronger creatures, yet Descartes continues to mention that although they may have a margin of superiority in certain areas, "it is also very remarkable that they show none at all in many other actions." This is because they lack the ability to develop greater understanding beyond the abilities their organs allow. Likewise, machines make human life easier at times simply by being able to accomplish things better than a human could on their own. Descartes uses the example of a clock being able to "count the hours and measure time more accurately than we can with all our carefulness." However, a clock cannot learn and new skills beyond telling the time, nor can it adapt to new situations as humans can.
He wraps up his discourse in Part V by mentioning a third major difference between animals and humans, namely, the soul. Descartes declares that the human rational soul "can in no way be derived from the potentiality of matter." In this section, everything mentioned pertaining to the human body can be built up, that is, the human body is based upon matter such that an individual is able to enhance their body and their abilities. The soul carries no mass and is made of no matter, and is unlike the rest of the body in that sense. We as humans carry a God-given soul that no other species possesses, and it is important that we realize not only this, but also that an individual's soul, Descartes explains, is independent from her or his body and does not die when the body does. the soul is immortal.
In summery, according to René Descartes in part V of his Discourse on Method, animals are like machines. This is because animals do not possess the capability of expressing their thoughts verbally, nor are they capable of adopting a further understanding of life beyond that creature's body's disposition. Descartes also explains that this is because humans, unlike "beasts", were created by God with an immortal, yet intangible and formless, soul.
---------
there are 9 more of these little bundles of joy to come this semester. glorious.
-ap.
January 16, 2007
Halo-a-thon
my house, or the House of Kings as the five of us like to call it, is known amongst our group of friends as a house where the door is always open. don't have anything to do? stop by our house; we have our fare share of get-togethers. sometimes only a few (8) people, but sometimes we host organized events in which we attract a multitude of peeps (for example, the Post-Ichthus Dance Party attracted somewhere near 80 guests).
today my roommate hosted a smaller event called a Halo-a-thon. yes, yes, the popular XBOX game "Halo" was played for 7 hours straight at my house today. 16 people. 8 in the living room, 8 in my room. 4 consoles. 7 hours. confession: i was the 16th person to join. i refused to play for a very long time, but then i realized that instead of playing i was just sitting and watching everyone else play. what is more pathetic, playing Halo for 7 hours or watching other people play Halo for 7 hours? so i played my first Halo ever today, and i'm not gonna lie - i really enjoyed it. its a lot more fun than i ever expected it to be. and in the setting i played it (team games 8 on 8) it really does promote some sort of community. there is strategy, cooperation and a lot more talking than in anticipated. i played about 3 of the 7 hours, and i enjoyed most of it. except for part of the time when we played with rocket launchers and i got my butt handed to me. but i owned in "Tower of Power".
my username was "angry emo kids". so every time i killed someone it said "You were killed by angry emo kids."
one time i killed myself and it said "angry emo kids committed suicide." i'll be honest. i laughed.
anyways. i thought i'd share that. i'm not really a gamer, but my outlook on the game has changed drastically in the course of three hours.
-ap.
today my roommate hosted a smaller event called a Halo-a-thon. yes, yes, the popular XBOX game "Halo" was played for 7 hours straight at my house today. 16 people. 8 in the living room, 8 in my room. 4 consoles. 7 hours. confession: i was the 16th person to join. i refused to play for a very long time, but then i realized that instead of playing i was just sitting and watching everyone else play. what is more pathetic, playing Halo for 7 hours or watching other people play Halo for 7 hours? so i played my first Halo ever today, and i'm not gonna lie - i really enjoyed it. its a lot more fun than i ever expected it to be. and in the setting i played it (team games 8 on 8) it really does promote some sort of community. there is strategy, cooperation and a lot more talking than in anticipated. i played about 3 of the 7 hours, and i enjoyed most of it. except for part of the time when we played with rocket launchers and i got my butt handed to me. but i owned in "Tower of Power".
my username was "angry emo kids". so every time i killed someone it said "You were killed by angry emo kids."
one time i killed myself and it said "angry emo kids committed suicide." i'll be honest. i laughed.
anyways. i thought i'd share that. i'm not really a gamer, but my outlook on the game has changed drastically in the course of three hours.
-ap.
January 15, 2007
January 14, 2007
the identity of indiscernibles
its snowing/icing/raining/sleeting/nasty outside and I'm pretty much stuck at home, so excuse the multiple updates in one day. not that i don't sometimes do that already, i just have an excuse today.
i did my first reading assignment for my Theories of Knowledge and Reality class on Friday evening. yes, i was at home reading about philosophy on Friday night. feel free to make fun of me for being lame. my pathetic social life aside, the selection i was supposed to read was out of the book Metaphysics: An Anthology. really really interesting stuff. hopefully the other 700 pages or whatever continue to be equally as intriguing.
the basic question the selection proposed was whether or not two objects can be truly identical in every way. i love thinking about ridiculous and confusing and relatively meaningless questions like that to begin with, so i was hooked before i even opened the book. i was also really encouraged because the majority of the arguments mentioned in the book were the exact ones i'd mulled over in my head before even starting the selection. i actually felt smart.
in the case of this question, as well as similar ones, my gut instinct is to be skeptical of both answers. because the motivation for such a question is solely to get you to think and struggle with answers. but my initial and final answers in this case were the same: i don't believe it to be possible.
my favorite reasoning is that even if two objects were physically 100% identical, they could never be 100% identical relationally. if you have two objects, a and b, they cannot be in the same place, otherwise they would be just one object, so they must be varying distances from any object c (unless, of course, object c was on the two dimensional plane centered between the objects a and b). for example, imagine i lay the two objects on my "desk" in front of me (anyone who has seen my room knows why desk is in quotes). if i lay them side by side and pick a third object in the room, say my lamp, and were to measure each object's distance from that lamp they wouldn't be the same. (the line between the two represents the center plane between the objects.)
____lamp__________A____|____B____
object B is clearly farther from the lamp than object A, and thus, in relation to the lamp, they are different. so the only way for them to be entirely identical relationally would be if 1) they were the only two objects in the universe or 2) if everything that happened on one side of the center plane was perfectly mirrored on the opposite side, so if a banana was to the left of A then an identical banana would have to be the same distance away to the right of B. but since neither situation exists then it is not possible.
but even if, lets say, they did exist, neither of those are even possible. both for weird strange reasons, but for reasons that make sense.
reason 1 (or the "only two items in the universe" theory): lets say the universe really does only exist of these two floating objects. first of all we could never label them "object A" and "object B" because then the labeler has made a distinction between them and, therefore, they aren't identical. the one on the observer's left is A and the one on the observer's right is B, that is a difference already. also, they could never been viewed at all. because the moment i see the two objects, then i am in the universe as well and the two are now are different relationally from me.
now you might say "well sure ap. but what if you're on the center plane?" well, my friend, that would mean that my entire left side would be identical to my right side. i would be ambidextrus, yes, but more importantly to this post, one side of my body would be mirrored to the other. thus, two hearts and two stomachs or two livers and two gall bladders (depending on which side of me was mirrored). that just doesn't make sense, nor would that work.
but even if we were biologically symmetrical and could view these two objects without screwing up the whole universe, we wouldn't ever be allowed to close our eyes or divert our sight from the objects ever. because once we did that there would be know way of knowing which object was which when you came back to look at it. A and B could've switched, and without knowing which object is which there can be no comparison.
reason 2 (or the "hugely infinite mirror between the objects" theory): the only way this would work is if the objects on the A side had no knowledge of the objects on the B side and vice versa. otherwise you could say that relationally object B is farther from any object c on the object A side, and vice versa.
assuming that to be the case, the objects would never be able to cross the center plane. once they started leaving one side they would start appearing on the other side. there would be morphing and overlapping and all sorts of of wack going on. but even if both of those scenarios were true, then you have two different universes both without the knowledge of the other and with no connection with the other. so how can anyone ever know that there are two objects in the first place? without the knowledge of the other object there can be no comparison.
and besides. even with all these ridiculous assumptions and scenarios, we live in a universe that is not the ones listed above, so whatever. let me know your thoughts.
-ap.
i did my first reading assignment for my Theories of Knowledge and Reality class on Friday evening. yes, i was at home reading about philosophy on Friday night. feel free to make fun of me for being lame. my pathetic social life aside, the selection i was supposed to read was out of the book Metaphysics: An Anthology. really really interesting stuff. hopefully the other 700 pages or whatever continue to be equally as intriguing.
the basic question the selection proposed was whether or not two objects can be truly identical in every way. i love thinking about ridiculous and confusing and relatively meaningless questions like that to begin with, so i was hooked before i even opened the book. i was also really encouraged because the majority of the arguments mentioned in the book were the exact ones i'd mulled over in my head before even starting the selection. i actually felt smart.
in the case of this question, as well as similar ones, my gut instinct is to be skeptical of both answers. because the motivation for such a question is solely to get you to think and struggle with answers. but my initial and final answers in this case were the same: i don't believe it to be possible.
my favorite reasoning is that even if two objects were physically 100% identical, they could never be 100% identical relationally. if you have two objects, a and b, they cannot be in the same place, otherwise they would be just one object, so they must be varying distances from any object c (unless, of course, object c was on the two dimensional plane centered between the objects a and b). for example, imagine i lay the two objects on my "desk" in front of me (anyone who has seen my room knows why desk is in quotes). if i lay them side by side and pick a third object in the room, say my lamp, and were to measure each object's distance from that lamp they wouldn't be the same. (the line between the two represents the center plane between the objects.)
____lamp__________A____|____B____
object B is clearly farther from the lamp than object A, and thus, in relation to the lamp, they are different. so the only way for them to be entirely identical relationally would be if 1) they were the only two objects in the universe or 2) if everything that happened on one side of the center plane was perfectly mirrored on the opposite side, so if a banana was to the left of A then an identical banana would have to be the same distance away to the right of B. but since neither situation exists then it is not possible.
but even if, lets say, they did exist, neither of those are even possible. both for weird strange reasons, but for reasons that make sense.
reason 1 (or the "only two items in the universe" theory): lets say the universe really does only exist of these two floating objects. first of all we could never label them "object A" and "object B" because then the labeler has made a distinction between them and, therefore, they aren't identical. the one on the observer's left is A and the one on the observer's right is B, that is a difference already. also, they could never been viewed at all. because the moment i see the two objects, then i am in the universe as well and the two are now are different relationally from me.
now you might say "well sure ap. but what if you're on the center plane?" well, my friend, that would mean that my entire left side would be identical to my right side. i would be ambidextrus, yes, but more importantly to this post, one side of my body would be mirrored to the other. thus, two hearts and two stomachs or two livers and two gall bladders (depending on which side of me was mirrored). that just doesn't make sense, nor would that work.
but even if we were biologically symmetrical and could view these two objects without screwing up the whole universe, we wouldn't ever be allowed to close our eyes or divert our sight from the objects ever. because once we did that there would be know way of knowing which object was which when you came back to look at it. A and B could've switched, and without knowing which object is which there can be no comparison.
reason 2 (or the "hugely infinite mirror between the objects" theory): the only way this would work is if the objects on the A side had no knowledge of the objects on the B side and vice versa. otherwise you could say that relationally object B is farther from any object c on the object A side, and vice versa.
assuming that to be the case, the objects would never be able to cross the center plane. once they started leaving one side they would start appearing on the other side. there would be morphing and overlapping and all sorts of of wack going on. but even if both of those scenarios were true, then you have two different universes both without the knowledge of the other and with no connection with the other. so how can anyone ever know that there are two objects in the first place? without the knowledge of the other object there can be no comparison.
and besides. even with all these ridiculous assumptions and scenarios, we live in a universe that is not the ones listed above, so whatever. let me know your thoughts.
-ap.
Children of Men
i saw Children of Men last night at the wonderful and regularly overpopulated Seth Childs Carmike Cinema last night. it was really interesting. the movie is set in the year 2027, and, apparently, women have been infertile since the year 2009. the movie starts out with a news program about how the youngest human on earth has died; he was 18 years and 4 months old.this movie is the most intense film i've seen recently. it has a little saving-private-ryan-esque quality about it near the end. yes, i'm serious. thats how intense this movie gets. it seems ridiculous, but lets be honest, if our world all of a sudden couldn't reproduce and the end of our civilization was inevitable i think things would get rather wild.
a war has broken out. the movie is set in England, but one must assume that the entire world is in utter chaos. England has closed its borders and the British government is attempting to wipe out all of the illegal immigrants in the country. the war is a civil one between the government and a group of "terrorists" in support of a thing called the Human Project. we never really find out what goes on in the Human Project, but we are led to believe that it is the hope of the world, yet there is curiosity as to whether or not it even exists.
Theo (Clive Owen) is called upon by the leader of the terrorist group Julian (Julianne Moore) to help transport an African American girl to the Human Project. initially the entire task seems confusing and overly dramatic to Theo until he finds out the urgency of the situation and the importance of this woman: she is pregnant. Theo takes on the task of transporting the girl himself. They can't trust the government or the terrorist group, both of them will want to use the baby for political purposes.
this film is creepy, scary, intense, and amazing all at the same time. i'm trying to figure out whether or not i was a huge fan of it. a movie really has to be bad for me not to like it or for me not to at least come away with a slight sense of joy because of it. but i'd say on a scale from 1 to 10...probably a 7. it was really good but the action was over the top. it never stopped either, constant explosions/gunshots/deaths. a very graphic movie - apparently there are so many people dying that they dont give anyone proper burials anymore, so regularly throughout the movie you see huge piles of charred and burning bodies. pitch black arms and legs sticking out of the mangled mess of flesh. sick.
if you're not a wiener and you can handle some serious intensity then i'd recommend seeing this movie at some point. its a really interesting idea in the least. at one point you see a curbside prophet on a pair of stilts screaming into a megaphone about how "God has taken his greatest gift from us." a really cool line i think. in today's society we have a tendency to view sex as a sinful act because of how inappropriately it is manifested in the lives of humanity, but in reality it is an amazing and beautiful thing, and without it we couldn't survive as a people.
oh man. there is one part when Theo clocks a dude in the face with some 10 pound metal box of some sort and a collective "OHH!" resounded throughout the theater. it was awesome.
anyway, like i said, i give it a 7.
-ap.
and since every post must have a "ps", if you are in a movie with three punks from ft. riley three rows behind you talking constantly about how 'f-ing gay this movie is' and how it is 'the worst f-ing movie [they've] ever seen' then you should turn around and do something about it. throw a Jujube at them or something (but not a red one. those are the only flavor worth the trouble of tonguing out of your teeth). i didn't do anything and it nearly ruined the movie for me.
January 13, 2007
January 12, 2007
i dont know much about computers...
a little background: if you haven't seen/discovered/been told about the g.i. joe videos online then you should check them out. it will help you appreciate the the song/video i'm about to share with you. here is a link to an entire list of these types of videos...but if you've seen these please read on. actually, read on regardless, but if you don't quite get the video, well, thats why.
what they've done is taken all the old public service announcements that used to air after the g.i. joe cartoons on tv and over-dubbed ridiculous things to the video. so when they used to say things like "dont talk to strange dogs" and teach little kiddos important messages, but now they say "stop all the downloading."
anyways. my buddy, paul, and i got together and decided to remix the over dubbings and turn them into some sick beats. hopefully we'll do a handful of them, but the first one we did was the don't talk to stray dogs one. go here to watch it.
and now what i really am wanting to post on this site: the final product. the remix itself. the song took paul and i a couple nights to do. we took the tune the kid hums at the beginning and made it the melody. i think it turned out real great - my favorite part is definitely when we cut and spliced the tangent the kid goes on at the end of the video into a tight rap breakdown. let me know what you think. here it is:
props to ben hollon for putting the video together.
-ap.
what they've done is taken all the old public service announcements that used to air after the g.i. joe cartoons on tv and over-dubbed ridiculous things to the video. so when they used to say things like "dont talk to strange dogs" and teach little kiddos important messages, but now they say "stop all the downloading."
anyways. my buddy, paul, and i got together and decided to remix the over dubbings and turn them into some sick beats. hopefully we'll do a handful of them, but the first one we did was the don't talk to stray dogs one. go here to watch it.
and now what i really am wanting to post on this site: the final product. the remix itself. the song took paul and i a couple nights to do. we took the tune the kid hums at the beginning and made it the melody. i think it turned out real great - my favorite part is definitely when we cut and spliced the tangent the kid goes on at the end of the video into a tight rap breakdown. let me know what you think. here it is:
props to ben hollon for putting the video together.
-ap.
January 11, 2007
Review/Top 10: Heavier Things
if you're someone who actually frequents my blog on a regular basis (might be three of you) you are already fully aware that i picked up "Heavier Things" over Christmas break. in this post i expressed my regret for not accepting John Mayer as an exceptional artist years ago. i stubbornly refused to like his stuff. i dissed on him childishly saying his vocals were too breathy and sensual. in retrospect i realize i was just too immature to appreciate him. (sounds like we're in a relationship. eh. we kinda are.)
but anyways, that view has obviously changed in the last few weeks. so much, in fact, that i am prepared to do another lil review. i'm not going into detail about each track, but i think i'll rank the songs in order of my likeness (either first to last or last to first - i haven't decided how i'll do it yet - probably last to first, more dramatic and i think it more successfully highlights songs individual songs). but i will refer to it as the "Top 10" because just because song number ten is song number ten doesnt make it the worst on the cd. it just makes it the 10th best. thats how i roll at least - optimism and positive vibes. ready break.
(10) 6. home life
(9) 7. split screen sadness
(8) 2. bigger than my body
(7) 3. something's missing
(6) 4. new deep
(5) 9. only heart
(4) 10. wheel
(3) 1. clarity
(2) 8. daughters
(1) 5. come back to bed
granted this "top 10" might shift and adjust as i continue to live off this album, these are the current AP Rankings, though the Coaches' Poll might read differently (i'm so clever).
-ap.
ps: i'd also like to take this post to recommend The Beatles saucy remix cd "Love" it is the other musical masterpiece i've been thriving on as of late. apparently the dude that used to mix all the Beatles old stuff decided to break out all the master tapes and throw together some genius. i was skeptical when i first heard about it ("how many albums can they put out after they're done?") but this one is great and worth a listen. or even a lot of listens. so so great.
but anyways, that view has obviously changed in the last few weeks. so much, in fact, that i am prepared to do another lil review. i'm not going into detail about each track, but i think i'll rank the songs in order of my likeness (either first to last or last to first - i haven't decided how i'll do it yet - probably last to first, more dramatic and i think it more successfully highlights songs individual songs). but i will refer to it as the "Top 10" because just because song number ten is song number ten doesnt make it the worst on the cd. it just makes it the 10th best. thats how i roll at least - optimism and positive vibes. ready break.
(10) 6. home life
(9) 7. split screen sadness
(8) 2. bigger than my body
(7) 3. something's missing
(6) 4. new deep
(5) 9. only heart
(4) 10. wheel
(3) 1. clarity
(2) 8. daughters
(1) 5. come back to bed
granted this "top 10" might shift and adjust as i continue to live off this album, these are the current AP Rankings, though the Coaches' Poll might read differently (i'm so clever).
-ap.
ps: i'd also like to take this post to recommend The Beatles saucy remix cd "Love" it is the other musical masterpiece i've been thriving on as of late. apparently the dude that used to mix all the Beatles old stuff decided to break out all the master tapes and throw together some genius. i was skeptical when i first heard about it ("how many albums can they put out after they're done?") but this one is great and worth a listen. or even a lot of listens. so so great.
January 09, 2007
alveolar osteitis.
so i got my wisdom teeth pulled on friday morning, and so far i've had no problems whatsoever. no swelling, very minimal pain, and i quit bleeding after a couple hours. i am, however, unbelievably paranoid that something will start hurting/go wrong.
it is four days after surgery and my stitches have already dissolved/fallen out and i just have big holes in the back of my mouth now. everything is probably all kosher and good, but it is just such a strange feeling that i can't help but wonder if everything is going according to plan. but i imagine that if something was wrong then i'd truly know it. so i'm safe to assume, for now, that there is nothing wrong.
i'm wary of these things called dry sockets (or for you dental freaks, alveolar osteitis). apparently they are an common post-surgery issue with wisdom teeth extraction. wikipedia says it "occurs when the blood clot at the site of a tooth extraction is disrupted prematurely." i'm not sure what that looks like in my mouth though. i've just got a big hole back there and thats it, but wikipedia also says that it is "often extremely unpleasant for the patient, as symptoms include extreme pain (sometimes worse than the toothache that indicated the extraction), a foul taste, bad breath, and swelling in the infected area. There may be lymph-node involvement." i have no pain. my mouth tastes of its usual lovliness, and i assure you, my lymph-nodes are in no way involved. and i'm not even on pain meds. i don't need those. please. i'm a man.
i've been cautious and responsible about it though. jimmy eat world might say i've "done nothing wrong" and green day might ask "am i just paranoid, or am i just stoned?"
thanks guys, being stoned is of equal importance as lymph-nodes for me.
-ap.
it is four days after surgery and my stitches have already dissolved/fallen out and i just have big holes in the back of my mouth now. everything is probably all kosher and good, but it is just such a strange feeling that i can't help but wonder if everything is going according to plan. but i imagine that if something was wrong then i'd truly know it. so i'm safe to assume, for now, that there is nothing wrong.
i'm wary of these things called dry sockets (or for you dental freaks, alveolar osteitis). apparently they are an common post-surgery issue with wisdom teeth extraction. wikipedia says it "occurs when the blood clot at the site of a tooth extraction is disrupted prematurely." i'm not sure what that looks like in my mouth though. i've just got a big hole back there and thats it, but wikipedia also says that it is "often extremely unpleasant for the patient, as symptoms include extreme pain (sometimes worse than the toothache that indicated the extraction), a foul taste, bad breath, and swelling in the infected area. There may be lymph-node involvement." i have no pain. my mouth tastes of its usual lovliness, and i assure you, my lymph-nodes are in no way involved. and i'm not even on pain meds. i don't need those. please. i'm a man.
i've been cautious and responsible about it though. jimmy eat world might say i've "done nothing wrong" and green day might ask "am i just paranoid, or am i just stoned?"
thanks guys, being stoned is of equal importance as lymph-nodes for me.
-ap.
January 08, 2007
Review: Jay-Z - Kingdom Come
Jay-Z officially returned from retirement on November 21, 2006, which, coincidentally, was the first day of Thanksgiving Break for yours truly. So I woke up at 9 AM on the 21st and made my first purchase ever at the Best Buy in Manhattan, Kansas: Shawn Carter's latest work, "Kingdom Come". I had a 2 hour drive home to KC to allow Jay's new work sink in (an amount of time i have discovered is necessary to allot if you are ever to truly appreciate and understand an artist. if you want to tackle a cd - drive to Manhattan - you'll have nothing else to do but dwell on the tunes and make fun of Topeka.)upon my first listen, i wasn't terribly impressed. i think i came into it expecting "The Black Album" and that isn't exactly what i got. "TBA" is clearly one of the best rap albums put out in recent years, and, lets be honest, is hard to top. Jay-Z doesn't top it in this album, however, this turned out to be exceptional. its not wrong. just different.
1. The Prelude - this first track was shocking. strings and horns and not a lot of groove...on the first track! not gonna lie Jay, but this was a weak album opening. maybe he wanted to start it off on a slow note and work into track 2, but by the 1:15 mark i'm ready to move on to track 2, and about 95% of the time i don't even listen to The Prelude anymore. i mean, its not a bad track, but it isn't what i expect and love out of S. Carter.
2. Oh My God - this is more like the Jay i expect. lots of noise and lots of movement out of yours truly. i thought i was going to bust a hole in the dashboard the first time i heard this track. the cymbals go off and it pretty much forces me to do the same. Good Lord. some of the lyrics are weak, i think at least. He actually throws down some Kanye West rhyme early in the track. "if this is your first time hearing this, you're 'bout to experience some(one) so cold" is the first phrase of the song "We Don't Care" off "College Dropout". fun fact for the moment. i like this song, for sure, one of my favorites on the album.
3. Kingdom Come - Jay throws down some serious Hammertime on this song. the keyboard during the verses is straight out of MC Hammer's "Can't Touch This", it's just spiced up a bit. okay, actually a lot. I'm a fan of this song too. Again, not the same as "TBA", it's a different Jay-Z but i do like it. i think he just puts down more beats and puts less emphasis on the lyrics. The chorus in this song leaves a bit to be desired as fas as i'm concerned, but the keyboard chords during the verses more than makes up for it - plus at 1:39ish he actually says "can't touch this". big fan. i did an audio doubletake the first time i heard it - i knew i could place the beat, but i couldn't figure it out until then, but once i heard it i immediately rewound it 30 seconds and did it again.
4. Show Me What You Got - the single. this song probably got more media than any other this year. between the Budweiser commercials for it and the 9 million internet ads i've seen for it i'd say Jay's gotten this track out to the public rather effectively. though i like the song, i'm not sure how i feel about the video. the video opens and features Danica Patrick racing Dale Earnhardt Jr. and Jay-Z through Monaco (which is the second smallest nation on earth after the Vatican). the rest of the video is tight, but i'm not gonna lie, when i think about Jay-Z saying "show me what you got lil mama" i did not picture Danica Patrick (not that she isn't beautiful, she is, i just more expected...i dunno...Beyonce) nor did i picture Dale Earnhardt Jr. anywhere in the mix (he and his lame-o Wrangler tight jeans commercials. not a huge fan.) but anyway speaking of tight, this song is. a terrific song for Jay-Z to announce his comeback with. love the "and wave" parts. the rest of the video is awesome. here it is: http://youtube.com/watch?v=qopwiGItevI
5. Lost One (feat. Chrisette Michele) - there are a couple songs on this album that are surprisingly low key and are flirting with rhythm and blues. the next two tracks are both examples of this. i especially like the end of the first verse - Shawn starts talking about how "fame is the worst drug known to man". it is encouraging to hear things like that from a wealthy entrepreneur like Jay-Z. if i were Jay-Z i'd be so full of myself, thats for sure. This song is a winner though.
6. Do You Wanna Ride (feat. John Legend) - John Legend can give any song some serious soul, and this song is no exception. This is a song, much like track 5, that rides the rap/r&b fence for sure. Man. John Legend is just so great. thats all i have to say about this song. just sit back and enjoy the ride cause it is smooooth.
7. 30 Something - this song makes me laugh. Jay-Z is trying to convince everyone that he's still awesome even though he's in his 30's. I find this funny for a number of reasons: first, what is it with rappers and having to explain themselves? eminem is the worst about it. i think he's great, but half his songs are all about the fact that he's controversial and why. i dont get it, but Jay-Z decided to do that here. I'm thirty and a millionaire and grown up and mature, basically. he goes on and on about how he used to be versus how he is now. he's still Shawn. he's got "good credit and such." oh, and secondly, i just think its funny that Jay-Z has to let people know he's awesome. i mean c'mon. Jay-Z will be awesome til he dies, he doesn't need to prove himself.
8. I Made It - just in case we weren't aware, Jay-Z made it big. his mom should be proud of him because he's from Brooklyn and he made something great of himself. it's a decent song, but it's got the same message as a bunch of his songs: even a poor kid from NYC can make it big - a good message, but seriously Jay, get some more material. that harsh, but i kinda feel that way. a typical number 8 track - weak and unconnected to the beginning or the end. the mid/late tracks fall off sharply.
9. Anything (feat. Usher & Pharrell) - this is just too much usher and pharrell - this is not the Shawn Carter of old. this song is more like "Usher and Pharrell featuring Jay-Z. Again though, these aren't necessarily bad tracks, just not what i expected.
10. Hollywood (feat. Beyonce Knowles) - i must admit, i really like this song. probably because i honestly like Beyonce's sound, but i really like the beat too. There's this part at the beginning when Beyonce sings something and then Jay-Z repeats it in his own tighter-sounding words: "come to my place (come to the crib) and we'll discuss it (lets chop it up)". haha. lovin it. the chorus makes me feel like i just hopped out of a limo onto the red carpet. lights. camera. hollywood. i'm a fan of this track.
11. Trouble - what a club beat this little diddy is. grind on folks.
12. Dig a Hole (feat. Sterling Simms) - go 'head, bury yourself. this song and the one preceding it land in the roll-up-in-an-escalade-with-spinners category.
13. Minority Report (feat. Ne-Yo) - this song is devastating. it's about Hurricane Katrina's effect on the slums in the Gulf Area. it is a cry out from Jay-Z regarding how poorly the situation was handled in New Orleans, it is critical of the government and leaves off with Kanye West's rather controversial comment to the press saying that "George Bush doesn't care about black people." hopefully and most likely that is not the case, however, the argument is sung beautifully and forcefully: it seems like no one even cares about the many people (predominantly black) in our very own country left homeless in the aftermath of Katrina. many audio clips of the refugees are used and it really hurts to hear. our government ought to be able to help save those in need in the South. this song tugs at my heartstrings terribly and it is one of the best songs on the album and possibly my favorite.
14. Beach Chair (feat. Chris Martin) - the album closes with this harpsichord track. it's a slow song about life and how S.C. lives his. "life is but a beach chair." from what i've gathered, Jay-Z is playing off the "life's a beach" phrase and turning it around to a positive and optimistic view. life is but a relaxing day in the sun. fulfill your dreams and do what you want. life isn't a beach - its a beach chair. its a nice closing song, i think. kinda eerie in parts even, i like it.
a large portion of the cd doesnt excite me too terribly much, but there are a handful of songs that get me going bigtime. tracks 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, and 13, are all terrific - and thats more than half the album. "Kingdom Come" isn't as great as his past works, but i have trouble comparing cause it is a completely different Jay-Z from his past albums. i do like it though, and overall i think it's pretty great. scale from 1 to 10...probably a 6.5. but still. there are a handful of songs that make this cd worth it. (plus it comes with a DVD. sizzler.)
-ap.
PS. i realize my track summaries got worse and worse as the album progressed, that is largely due to the fact that i dont really have any motivation to do things i dont really care about. i tried on the tracks i like and i didn't try on the rest. so phooey.
school supplies
it is amazing how quickly life can go from being really fun to really busy in a matter of moments. just an hour ago i was playing Lion King on SEGA with my buddy Dan. Then here i am finding out that i have to pay rent and tuition, pack my stuff, finalize my schedule, get a new job, buy books and go back to Manhattan. talk about a buzzkill.
just as my "break" begins to slow down and i get a chance to relax for a day it picks back up almost immediately into a hurricane of errands/payments. there is just so much stress that comes with a new semester. way too much work. seriously. life should not need to be so busy.
but one thing that always seems to bring a bit of relief is school supply shopping. today i went to Office Max and picked up five graph spiral notebooks, two folders and some batteries and as i left the register i felt a slight sense of calmness. school supplies just have this crisp organized feeling about them that makes me feel so prepared. i leave that store ready to destroy any course that steps in my way. i'm organized and motivated and B's are not an option.
but i know the moment i get to class the first day i'm going to open up my graph spirals and write "Linguistic Anthropology" or "Religion in American History" at the top and i'll want it to look so perfect so that it would match the crispness of the unused spirals. but thats just not possible. so i'll probably erase it and write it again, trying to land the perfect lettering, but in the process i'll smudge up the first try and it'll just make it worse and by the end of my first class period i will quickly remember what a poor student i truly am. awesome.
but for now, i'll savor the organization and go to bed because i have a lot of junk to accomplish in the morning.
stupid school, always raining on my parade.
-ap.
just as my "break" begins to slow down and i get a chance to relax for a day it picks back up almost immediately into a hurricane of errands/payments. there is just so much stress that comes with a new semester. way too much work. seriously. life should not need to be so busy.
but one thing that always seems to bring a bit of relief is school supply shopping. today i went to Office Max and picked up five graph spiral notebooks, two folders and some batteries and as i left the register i felt a slight sense of calmness. school supplies just have this crisp organized feeling about them that makes me feel so prepared. i leave that store ready to destroy any course that steps in my way. i'm organized and motivated and B's are not an option.
but i know the moment i get to class the first day i'm going to open up my graph spirals and write "Linguistic Anthropology" or "Religion in American History" at the top and i'll want it to look so perfect so that it would match the crispness of the unused spirals. but thats just not possible. so i'll probably erase it and write it again, trying to land the perfect lettering, but in the process i'll smudge up the first try and it'll just make it worse and by the end of my first class period i will quickly remember what a poor student i truly am. awesome.
but for now, i'll savor the organization and go to bed because i have a lot of junk to accomplish in the morning.
stupid school, always raining on my parade.
-ap.
January 07, 2007
pimp or porphet?
i'm not really sure what i think about this guy. he was just standing outside outside a Hooters in downtown ATL belting "REPENT. REPENT. REPENT." i snapped this quality picture of him and thought i'd share. apparently he had a vision about this? hm.
maybe i'll call him and find out.
-ap.
passion unpacking part two of some
track 5 on A Collision (3 + 4 = 7) from David Crowder*Band is entitled "Foreverandever Etc..." it incorporates whistling and a keytar and is a truly childish song. I've always skipped over this song on the cd because it really never fancied me much. Crowder's lyrics are typically so spiritual and genius, and, to be honest, this song didn't match up.
so i'm outside with 24,999 other college students from every state in the US, freezing my butt cheeks off on the 3rd of January, wishing i was back in the hotel room so i could watch LSU kick the crap out of Notre Dame, and Crowder pulls out the keytar. and i'm totally not excited about it. don't get me wrong, the keytar is tight, but i have the cd and i know how childish the ensuing song is going to be.
there is one point in the song (where the song gets its name i assume) when the lyrics break down into a not-too-difficult-to-follow sequence that goes something like "i am Yours forever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and yadda yadda yadda yadda you get it." the quintessential moment of childish worship music banter erupted amongst the mass of 20-somethings, and i felt dumb.
yet on Wednesday night at about 11:00 PM Eastern Standard Time in Atlanta, Georgia, Crowder pulled out his keytar and played this song outdoors between the Georgie Dome and the Phillips Arena and a wave of understanding flowed over me. the song appears childish because that is exactly how it is supposed to appear. i think a lot of people, myself included, can get wrapped up in the theology and the politics and the issues of Christianity and we can sometimes miss the unbelievable relationship we have with our Father. our Father. we are little sons and daughters of God and i think sometimes we try and make ourselves bigger and better and miss what an incredible reality this is.
we have a loving Father in Heaven who cares about our every move. He loves us dearly and i know i forget that.
track five may be fruity, but Crowder wanted it that way. because that is what joy in our Heavenly Father truly looks like. we are children of God who jump and scream and dance in his presence. we giggle and squirm and laugh with Him.
here are the lyrics:
how cool is that? childish? maybe, but a legitimate thrill in our Father? definitely. so beautiful.
and suddenly i went from being my pessimistic critical self to the 25,000th dancer in the crowd. i realized the truth of it and how wonderful and joyous this song is. we are children of God lets act like it. lets go outside and jump in a pile of leaves with Him, or lets all go sledding with Him, or lets all go swimming with Him.
he is our Dad and our Papa.
how incredible to know. how impossible and true.
i am Yours.
-ap.
so i'm outside with 24,999 other college students from every state in the US, freezing my butt cheeks off on the 3rd of January, wishing i was back in the hotel room so i could watch LSU kick the crap out of Notre Dame, and Crowder pulls out the keytar. and i'm totally not excited about it. don't get me wrong, the keytar is tight, but i have the cd and i know how childish the ensuing song is going to be.there is one point in the song (where the song gets its name i assume) when the lyrics break down into a not-too-difficult-to-follow sequence that goes something like "i am Yours forever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and yadda yadda yadda yadda you get it." the quintessential moment of childish worship music banter erupted amongst the mass of 20-somethings, and i felt dumb.
yet on Wednesday night at about 11:00 PM Eastern Standard Time in Atlanta, Georgia, Crowder pulled out his keytar and played this song outdoors between the Georgie Dome and the Phillips Arena and a wave of understanding flowed over me. the song appears childish because that is exactly how it is supposed to appear. i think a lot of people, myself included, can get wrapped up in the theology and the politics and the issues of Christianity and we can sometimes miss the unbelievable relationship we have with our Father. our Father. we are little sons and daughters of God and i think sometimes we try and make ourselves bigger and better and miss what an incredible reality this is.
we have a loving Father in Heaven who cares about our every move. He loves us dearly and i know i forget that.
track five may be fruity, but Crowder wanted it that way. because that is what joy in our Heavenly Father truly looks like. we are children of God who jump and scream and dance in his presence. we giggle and squirm and laugh with Him.
here are the lyrics:
Love so incredible to knowfalling for you for eternity. right here at your feet. where i want to be. i am Yours forever and ever and ever.......
It's never gonna go
Never gonna go
Love too impossible and true
For anyone but You
For anyone but You
I think I'm on the brink of something large
Maybe like the breaking of a dawn
Or maybe like a match being lit
Or the sinking of a ship
Letting go gives a better grip
I'm finding everything I'll ever need
By giving up gaining everything
Falling for You for eternity
Right here at Your feet
Where I wanna be
I am Yours
Love so indelible to know
You're never gonna go
You're never gonna go
Love too unthinkable and true
For anyone but You
For anyone but You
Maybe like a match being lit
Or the sinking of a ship
Letting go gives a better grip
I'm finding everything I'll ever need
By giving up gaining everything
Falling for You for eternity
Right here at Your feet
Where I wanna be
I am Yours
Forever and ever and ever and ever
And ever and ever and ever and ever... (repeat)
how cool is that? childish? maybe, but a legitimate thrill in our Father? definitely. so beautiful.
and suddenly i went from being my pessimistic critical self to the 25,000th dancer in the crowd. i realized the truth of it and how wonderful and joyous this song is. we are children of God lets act like it. lets go outside and jump in a pile of leaves with Him, or lets all go sledding with Him, or lets all go swimming with Him.
he is our Dad and our Papa.
how incredible to know. how impossible and true.
i am Yours.
-ap.
January 06, 2007
john mayer and spring 2007
i must admit, i initially refused to like john mayer, and as his stock rose in popularity i became stubborn and refused to give in. and here i am three or four years later loving his stuff. i bought "heavier things" a couple weeks ago and i'm slowly working my way into it track by track. so far i'm a big fan, much bigger than i expected to be. i used to not like him cause i thought he breathed instead of sang, but the more i listen the more i love it. i'm looking forward to picking up some of his other stuff and seeing if i'm equally as pleased.i'd also like to take time in this post to apologize to anyone i childishly dissed on for liking john mayer. he's quality and i am sorry.
the only thing i dont like about him now is the billboard of him in atlanta. he very much resembled Edward Scissorhands which very much creeped me out as a child. i saw it on TBS one night at a sleepover and i had nightmares for a month. bad news for sure. not that appearance really means anything to me..i'm a david crowder fan too.
in other news, classes start again on thursday. isn't that a treat? here's what i think i'm taking:
Philosophy 301: History of Modern Philosophy
Anthropology 220: Linguistic Anthropology
History 522: Religion in American History
Philosophy 340: Theories of Knowledge and Reality
English 680: Topics in Dr. Suess
we'll see how that goes. who knows.
-ap.
kc chiefs at indy colts
so the chiefs play today, which is shocking really. four teams had a chance to make the playoffs last week with a win at home: bengals, broncos, titans, chiefs. and if any of the other three teams on the list won then they took the chiefs' spot in the playoffs. but kansas city's luck changed that day and we're in and they're out. haha. the broncos didn't make it.
but, as is becoming the norm in the playoffs, the chiefs meet the colts first. the chiefs have played no other team in the post season since 1996, and we haven't beat the colts in the playoffs yet. there was the Lin Elliot game and the-game-with-no-punting. stupid stupid stupid.
but this year is different, or so i like to think, because for the first time it is the Colts who have the better record and are playing at home. we're the underdogs and can't "blow it" this year. they're expected to lose, so they have something to prove.
and this year is also different because the chiefs don't have a complete liability. in 1996 we had the best defense in the NFL and in 2003 we had the best offense in the NFL. this year KC has the number 16 offense and the number 16 defense. we probably don't deserve to even be in the playoffs because we are an all around average team, but at least we are an all around team. no serious flaws and no serious screw ups/Lin Elliots.
and this year we have some guy named Larry Johnson who ran for 1789 yards this season. half man, half beast, or "The Centaur" as Mitch Holtus (voice of the Chiefs, 101.1 KCFX) calls him. Indianapolis boasts the worst rushing defense in the NFL giving up 173 yards per game, and Larry Johnson ought to have a field day. i'm predicting 197 yards and 2 touchdowns for the Centaur.
however, Indianapolis has arguably the best quarterback to ever play the game. Peyton Manning is a freak, so that is obviously an issue. if the Chiefs can keep him off the field and if LJ runs the ball like he should then the Chiefs should make a game out of this one. so that having been said...the edge goes to...
when the Colts pass: Colts.
when the Chiefs pass: Colts.
when the Colts run: Chiefs.
when the Chiefs run: Chiefs.
special teams: Chiefs.
coaching: Colts.
overall? who knows. but i think the Chiefs have something to prove here.
so since i'm on meds and thinking optimistically...
Chiefs 31-24.
-ap.
ps: i think tony dungy and herm edwards could be cousins/brothers/related somehow. they look so much alike. yikes.
EDIT: the chiefs offense is apparently worthless. my love is dwindling.
but, as is becoming the norm in the playoffs, the chiefs meet the colts first. the chiefs have played no other team in the post season since 1996, and we haven't beat the colts in the playoffs yet. there was the Lin Elliot game and the-game-with-no-punting. stupid stupid stupid.
but this year is different, or so i like to think, because for the first time it is the Colts who have the better record and are playing at home. we're the underdogs and can't "blow it" this year. they're expected to lose, so they have something to prove.
and this year is also different because the chiefs don't have a complete liability. in 1996 we had the best defense in the NFL and in 2003 we had the best offense in the NFL. this year KC has the number 16 offense and the number 16 defense. we probably don't deserve to even be in the playoffs because we are an all around average team, but at least we are an all around team. no serious flaws and no serious screw ups/Lin Elliots.
and this year we have some guy named Larry Johnson who ran for 1789 yards this season. half man, half beast, or "The Centaur" as Mitch Holtus (voice of the Chiefs, 101.1 KCFX) calls him. Indianapolis boasts the worst rushing defense in the NFL giving up 173 yards per game, and Larry Johnson ought to have a field day. i'm predicting 197 yards and 2 touchdowns for the Centaur.
however, Indianapolis has arguably the best quarterback to ever play the game. Peyton Manning is a freak, so that is obviously an issue. if the Chiefs can keep him off the field and if LJ runs the ball like he should then the Chiefs should make a game out of this one. so that having been said...the edge goes to...
when the Colts pass: Colts.
when the Chiefs pass: Colts.
when the Colts run: Chiefs.
when the Chiefs run: Chiefs.
special teams: Chiefs.
coaching: Colts.
overall? who knows. but i think the Chiefs have something to prove here.
so since i'm on meds and thinking optimistically...
Chiefs 31-24.
-ap.
ps: i think tony dungy and herm edwards could be cousins/brothers/related somehow. they look so much alike. yikes.
EDIT: the chiefs offense is apparently worthless. my love is dwindling.
January 05, 2007
passion unpacking part one of some
this will more than likely be the first of a handful of passion-unpacking-posts. i got back last night around 10:30 from the Passion Conference in Atlanta. i went last year and it was enormously life-altering. this year it was a little different. not better or worse, still awesome and life-altering, but different still.
last year i went to Passion needing an eye opening experience. a swift Jesus-kick to the face if you will. not that i have it all together this year, because i most assuredly do not, but i have matured significantly in the past year and the "boom" from last year seemed slightly lacking this time. however, it made up for it in other areas.
last year i went for the music. i wanted to hear Crowder basically, but this year i went searching for a couple nuggets of knowledge to come away with. since this is passion though these nuggets manifested themselves in the form of boulders instead. i was hit with two major topics on this trip, discovering humility and reaching the unreached people groups of the world.
humility is something i've been fervently trying to master for years now. Beth Moore spoke on humility this year and had, as expected, some pretty dece thoughts. the one i latched on to most was the fact that if we lead humble lives we do so unnaturally, or the idea that we are naturally prideful as human beings. a stunning reality for me, and one that gave me a great deal of comfort. i'm not a very humble person, but my humility abounds in comparison to the self-centered life i've led in the past. i'm getting better, but just as we will never reach the apex of knowledge in life we will also never reach the apex of humility. we are unnaturally humble. we can strive for it all we like, but we will never achieve it to perfection. but that is good news because while one could see the glass half empty and say, "well, why try then?" another might see it more positively and realize that this is an amazing opportunity. while we will always be somewhat prideful, we can always arrive at a greater level of humility in our lives. that is good news.
the speakers, Louie Giglio, in particular, also drove home the importance of overseas missions, primarily to the unreached people of the world. a lot of the emphasis in the talks was that we should not become complacent in our Johnson County Lifestyle (my words, not theirs), but that instead we have a calling to preach. we have a duty to tell the world about Jesus Christ, and i thought both Louie and John Piper landed that point well. however, i was a little frustrated at the same time, i felt like they emphasized overseas missions nearly too much and failed to include the fact that everyone has their own mission field in their own town. i had a lengthy conversation with one of my best friends, Dan, about this. Both of us believe that everyone has their own mission field everywhere they go, and that the engineers, accountants, construction workers, teachers, and the whatevers all have their own area of influence as well. i felt like that point was missed along the way. i'm going into youth ministry soon, and even i felt a little guilt for not reaching out to the Della people of northern Iraq or the Muslims in Indonesia or whoever else hasn't heard the gospel. it was a message that needed to be presented and a message that needed to be heard, but i think a side note touching on the fact that not all of us are called to be long term missionaries would have been nice.
anyway. it was a really awesome trip and i still haven't come close to unpacking everything though (especially Piper's talk and Francis Chan's). i'm now reading Crowder's first book Praise Habit too. so look forward to a review of that dandy. lovin it so far.
but i now must go and attempt to eat dinner out at the Q without wisdom teeth. yesss.
-ap.
last year i went to Passion needing an eye opening experience. a swift Jesus-kick to the face if you will. not that i have it all together this year, because i most assuredly do not, but i have matured significantly in the past year and the "boom" from last year seemed slightly lacking this time. however, it made up for it in other areas.
last year i went for the music. i wanted to hear Crowder basically, but this year i went searching for a couple nuggets of knowledge to come away with. since this is passion though these nuggets manifested themselves in the form of boulders instead. i was hit with two major topics on this trip, discovering humility and reaching the unreached people groups of the world.
humility is something i've been fervently trying to master for years now. Beth Moore spoke on humility this year and had, as expected, some pretty dece thoughts. the one i latched on to most was the fact that if we lead humble lives we do so unnaturally, or the idea that we are naturally prideful as human beings. a stunning reality for me, and one that gave me a great deal of comfort. i'm not a very humble person, but my humility abounds in comparison to the self-centered life i've led in the past. i'm getting better, but just as we will never reach the apex of knowledge in life we will also never reach the apex of humility. we are unnaturally humble. we can strive for it all we like, but we will never achieve it to perfection. but that is good news because while one could see the glass half empty and say, "well, why try then?" another might see it more positively and realize that this is an amazing opportunity. while we will always be somewhat prideful, we can always arrive at a greater level of humility in our lives. that is good news.
the speakers, Louie Giglio, in particular, also drove home the importance of overseas missions, primarily to the unreached people of the world. a lot of the emphasis in the talks was that we should not become complacent in our Johnson County Lifestyle (my words, not theirs), but that instead we have a calling to preach. we have a duty to tell the world about Jesus Christ, and i thought both Louie and John Piper landed that point well. however, i was a little frustrated at the same time, i felt like they emphasized overseas missions nearly too much and failed to include the fact that everyone has their own mission field in their own town. i had a lengthy conversation with one of my best friends, Dan, about this. Both of us believe that everyone has their own mission field everywhere they go, and that the engineers, accountants, construction workers, teachers, and the whatevers all have their own area of influence as well. i felt like that point was missed along the way. i'm going into youth ministry soon, and even i felt a little guilt for not reaching out to the Della people of northern Iraq or the Muslims in Indonesia or whoever else hasn't heard the gospel. it was a message that needed to be presented and a message that needed to be heard, but i think a side note touching on the fact that not all of us are called to be long term missionaries would have been nice.
anyway. it was a really awesome trip and i still haven't come close to unpacking everything though (especially Piper's talk and Francis Chan's). i'm now reading Crowder's first book Praise Habit too. so look forward to a review of that dandy. lovin it so far.
but i now must go and attempt to eat dinner out at the Q without wisdom teeth. yesss.
-ap.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)