Wednesday, May 24, 2006

Games and the slippery slope

As you know, many people support not only the censorship of video games, but the banning of video games. For instance, Jack Thompson blames shooters such as Halo as training toolers for next generation Columbine. He also believes that many of today's world is warped by the world of gaming. Crimes are caused by Grand Theft Auto, etc.

My opinion? It's unjust, and it doesn't affect kids. But that's for another article.

What you may also know is that some states ban the sales of certain rated computer games. By taking these off the shelves, it reflects one things. Censorship. Yes, Censorship. This occurs on TV, since we're not allowed to put in high quality porn during peak hours. The internet is also the same thing with the new .xxx domain. But isn't the freedom of speech, expression, and information what seperates us from the Chinese? I should hope so.

By restricting these things, they rail out against what makes America so great. When is it so bad that I cannot play the games that I want? Call me a warped son of a bitch. Call me the next generation colmbine. Hell, call me a pedophile (RE: The Sims. Apparently Jack Thompson doesn't know anything about computers either). But one thing sets me different than the people who say this: I believe censorship is bad. And by this, I hope that America will understand how this is censorship.

So I leave you with this.
"Censorship started with little things, when the government controlled cartoons and the Radio. Then it went to the regular TV, school system, and finally the print."
-A badly remembered quote from Ray Bradbury Fahrenheit 451.

Monday, May 22, 2006

Anti-intellectual Television

Thinking back of my childhood, I remember watching TV. Some of my favorite shows included the Animaniacs and the Pinky and the Brain. Thinking about it, I realize that many things were a lot funnier than what I took them to be. Sure, I thought it was humorous back then, but even now I think it's humorous.

For example, I remember a part where you see Noah playing with a paddle ball, and he's talking to god. Those of you who have read this the entire time (if you exist), may remember,

"What about spiders?"
"ESPECIALLY SPIDERS."

Now, I can remember bits and pieces of that episode. One of which that I remember was Noah saying

"So I pretty much have to go 40 days and 40 nights in the cold, rain, this area is supposed to flood, and then I can get into heaven. Though I heard the food isn't very good up there."
*Noah gets zapped for saying that*

Now just thinking about that, made me realize the hilarity of that comment. The fact is that that statement is utterly hilarious. Of course the food isn't going to be very good in heaven, glutton is a sin. Now extending that thought, you realize that heaven can't be that good, because the things that we enjoy about life itself is a sin. Money. Power. Sex. Food. Gloating. Since you're in heaven, you're not allowed to do any of this. They're all sin.

Pinky and the Brain had a similar thing. I remember one where the person rings a bell, and both Pinky and the Brain does some sort of acrobatic trick. Keywords: Bell.

Bell = Pavlo.

You know, that experiment with the Pavlo ringing the bell and the dog coming to it?

So what does this have to do with anything? Read the title: Anti-intellectual Television.

Now a days, television no longer reflects the value of being well read. The boob tube has been taken over by reality TV, which has no hidden knowledge under it. It asks no philosophical questions, it does not relate to sociology, to science, not even to history. How the hell does American Idol relate to any of this? It doesn't. What it does serve is entertainment for the idiots of America.

So now I go back to the words that you should have remembered in the beginning of this essay:
back to my childhood. I turn on TV, and now I see spongebob. I saw spongebob two years ago, I didn't get anything. I see spongebob now, I still don't get anything. Why? There's nothing to understand. Like I stated before, there isn't any underlying intelligence behind whats on TV now. For the lack of better terms, its about two buffoons going around with their life. Kids find it funny, but to an adult, there is nothing fun to watch about it. It's just about this sponge character making a fool out of himself.

At least with the Animaniacs, it critisized everything about society. Even shrinks!

Such TV is now a forgotten cause. Renments of it still live on, such as the Simpsons, and Futurama. Why, a few days ago, I saw an episode of the Simpsons making fun of the movie, "The good, the bad, and the evil." Shows that require intelligence are dying. I mean, they even cancelled Futurama, which also did a good job making fun of society.

They say Shakesphere is a good interpretation of life back then.
Now, the Simpsons is the good interpretation.

But with this anti-intellectual society that's going on, such shows are dying out.

Of course, there are modern shows that still reflect intelligence, such as Battlestar Galactica.
A. It talks about greek mythology
B. It talks about the relation between polytheism and monotheism
C. Discrimination.

Such things are applicable to todays society. Spongebob? No.

This is why I switched to watching Japanese TV. Their cartoons have underlying messages behind them, and by watching it, sometimes I do feel like the idiot. For instance, Ergo Proxy deals a lot with mythology. The doctor is named freaking Daedalus (shame on you if you don't know who that is), but at the same time, I do not understand the symbolism behind the talking statues, Real, or the two demolished cities. Had I understood it, my appreciation for the show would dramatically increase.

Mythology not your taste?
Kino's travels often asks sociological questions. One of the most memorable questions talks about religion. One holy book was written for one city. But the combination of it spreading, and people talking about it, gradually led to the utter anihilation of a city. Sound familiar? Shoot yourself if it doesn't.

Wednesday, May 10, 2006

Orson Scott Card and Michael Crichton, Bad for Humanity

Media, and authors especially, must be very responsible, knowledgeable people about the topics they write about. It's too bad that Orson Scott Card and Micheal Crichton, two very famous science fiction writers, have no idea what they're talking about. These two are nothing more than very good writers, but they are not scientists, have no idea what science is, and are both doing a disservice to actual science for the public.

Let's start with Micheal Crichton. Skip past his books, which, while entertaining, are mere stock science fiction. Let's go to his public advocacy, in this case, of global warming (or lack thereof). His views, shown in his book State of Fear, include evidence, but not strong evidence, as it has been refuted by specialists in the field, including Dr. Jeffrey Masters, chief meteorologist at The Weather Underground. His evidence, therefore, is still very much under dispute.

The problem is that people are beginning to accept what he says as fact, simply because he wrote it into an "action-thriller" book. He has been called to testify in a Senate committee hearing. He has giving speeches attacking not just global warming, but the entire idea that the environment needs to be protected. But with his evidence itself still under dispute, how can he claim them as definitive sources?

As for Orson Scott Card, I think the essay I linked to says it all. What gives Card the authority to dismiss all of science as "invent[ing] plausible stories of automatic processes by which natural events, systems, and objects come to be as we see them"? What gives the authority to dismiss science, the process, as science, the Aesop's Fables of the Modern Day? Nothing. He creates a straw man position of science, and proceeds to "destroy" it. No wonder, considering that he is indeed an active member of the Church of Latter Day Saints.

Leave the theories of what might happen to the earth and what has happened to those who have actually studied the subject. Gain an actual background first, see their reasoning, and you'll see why evolution has become a dominant theory in science. It's not because it's convenient or because it's the atheists pushing it out. It's because rationally, it has been shown to be the best explanation for the data collected.

Even science fiction authors have a responsibility, and that responsibility is to not purposely destroy the foundations of science. Every time Chrichton writes an implausible story about the spread of a deadly virus, panic can ensue. Every time Card writes for the creationists, they get more irrational.

Saturday, May 06, 2006

Bush gets WTFPWNED. Must See Tv!

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4973617448770513925

Skip the first 50 minutes.