傻冒儿 Stupid Hat aka ShaMao'er

Home sweet home

Damn it's good to be back in the US.   After being back a week, I honesty can't think of anything that I prefer in China.  Sure there is that one thing but it doesn't measure up.   I certainly miss people, but I can't miss the place.

Clean air, it all starts with that.  Add to that people treating each other with courtesy and respect, a super fast internet connection, on-demand television, orderly traffic, a far more interesting job, no racism (against me anyway), the list can go on and on.   I guess my opinion may change over time, it will be interesting to see.

If every Chinaman would add 2 inches...

Yankees sign Chinese pitcher, catcher

Might as well just jump right back in here.   Hmm, who else can jump on the bandwagon? 

What is the liklihood that the skills of these 2 players earn them a spot on the Yankees minor league roster?  My guess, if these kids were born in Hoboken they wouldn't have a prayer.  The competitive baseball infrastructure just doesn't exist in China that would allow the development of that level of skill.

There is a reason the NBA is successful in China.  It is the same reason the NBA is successful just about everywhere globally and the same reason that soccer is the #1 sport worldwide.  The poor can play it!

It doesnt cost much to set up a makeshift basketball court or soccer field.  The equipment cost is neglible and can be improvised if need be.   Unless the state decides to sponsor it in a pretty serious manner as I suspect happens in the Caribbean, poor parents are not too likely to spend their meager savings on baseball equipment.   There is no reason that the Chinese govt would want to sponsor or even encourage baseball.

Chrysalis

Metamorphosis.   After about 4 years here, I will be leaving China in 3 days to return to live and work in the US.  I should have some kind of profound post to sum up my life here and thoughts thereon.  Instead I am just too busy and too tired of it all to come up with anything; maybe next time.   

I imagine that I will continue posting often on China at least until my interest slowly fades.  I will definitely continue posting on other things as they come to mind and I hope that my devout readers (all 2 or 3 of them) will continue in their devotion.    So that's it from China.  I suspect I won't post anything else for at least several days to a week.   

Back to the future

China appears to confront US defense of Taiwan

Wow, interesting stuff.   Two things strike me right away on this:

1) I have recently been listening to The Teaching Company's History of the United States (recommended by the way) and listened to the part about Pearl Harbor the other day.  Some of the text of that history lecture and the text of this article is nearly identical.  Who says the past doesn't repeat itself?

"A weakened initial U.S. response to a Chinese assault on Taiwan, for example, could result in the collapse of Taiwan's military resistance," said a Rand Corporation study for the U.S. Air Force published late last month. "The island might therefore capitulate before the United States could bring all its combat power to bear.

"If that were to happen, it seems unlikely that the United States would continue the conflict, even though U.S. military power would largely be intact," the study said

The Japanese in 1941 made the miscalculation that a quick initial overwhelming strike against the US Navy would undermine the US will to fight, particularly since US interests in the Pacific were perceived by the Japanese as tangential.   The Japanese likewise believed that the strident isolationist rhetoric of the US Congress during the 1930's indicated a fundamental lack of martial spirit, of the willingness to engage in any foreign action at all.   Similarity is quite striking really.  Guess we all know they were kind of wrong on both counts.

2) The high technology weapons the Chinese are deploying that the article gushes about are largely the result of purchases from Russia and some European nations.  However, a good portion are also the result of US companies selling "dual-use" goods to China; that is goods that have both civil and military use.  Although there are export control laws designed to prevent this from happening with sensitive technology, they are quite easily circumvented.  Additionally, organizations such as the American Chamber of Commerce in China and the US-China Business Council are actively lobbying the US gov't to liberalize trade in such goods.  In the event of an actual conflict with China over Taiwan or any other issue, I can only hope that these traitors will receive the traditional punishment for treason.

Sleep deprivation

No sleep = no post.   Wish me luck. 

Boom?

I guess the bubble is bursting at least somewhat.  Feels a bit anticlimatic actually. 

Tyranny of the minority

I was watching the Democratic party presidential candidates debate on CNN this morning while in the gym.  As is typical, the format and the questions were intended to generate sound bytes rather than any kind of meaningful dialogue or exploration of issues.   

I only watched about 1/2 hour of the debate, during which they spent at least 5-10 minutes discussing gays in the military and gay rights in general.   Now I don't really have anything against gay people as such (despite what CM might think).  It is a genetic variation that is beyond their control and so any sort of discrimination or hatred is just dumb.   In any event, I imagine the variation will be genetically altered/removed in most cases in future and so the population will diminish.   

The thing that I have a problem with is devoting a meaningful slice of time in the presidential debate to such a topic.  Who cares, other than gay people?   The gay population statistics are about as politically sensitive as they come but i guess the range is something like between 2% and 10%.   The 10% figure I believe was Kinsey's and has since been discredited and I haven't heard any serious higher figures tendered.  In any event, lets assume for the sake of argument that it is true; that 10% of all Americans are gay. 

So that would mean that conceivably 1 of 10 people watching the debate would care about this issue.  Can you imagine the incredibly wide range of issues facing the US which would effect more than 1 in 10 of the population?   The list would be very long and filled with issues that may fundamentally determine the shape of the next century and America's place within it.   

But no, instead they want to talk about gays in the military.   This is a giant misservice to the American people by the 4th estate (the media).  Even if the media has a much greater gay population than the population at large, even if the media was 100% gay, in a forum such as a presidential debate they should focus their attention on the giant issues that face the majority of the population, not a rather insignificant minority.

The wisdom of the plains

What I think about evolution    published in today's NY Times by Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas.

Hmm, where to start?   Clearly the Senator is a well-educated and articulate man, and yet he spouts such drivel. 

"But limiting this question to a stark choice between evolution and creationism does a disservice to the complexity of the interaction between science, faith and reason."

A very well written but ultimately nonsensical sentence.   When I read that line I think of the kind of quiz that children sometimes take where they are shown 3 pictures (say a cow, a pig, and a car) and asked to choose which one doesn't belong.   

It could be interpreted that he does not actually believe these things but is simply pandering to his Christian-right Kansas base.  But the fact that he chose to write such a detailed piece (when creationist type sound-bytes probably would suffice for that base) and publish it in the NY Times leads me to believe that it is likely he believes these things.

"It does not strike me as anti-science or anti-reason to question the philosophical presuppositions behind theories offered by scientists who, in excluding the possibility of design or purpose, venture far beyond their realm of empirical science."

There is nothing "beyond the realm of empirical science".  There is or will be scientific explanation for every  phenomenon existing in nature; for the origin of that phenomenon; and for every biologically /genetically driven emotion, action, or belief of human beings. 

The question is moot anyways.  I dont know why I keep bringing it up.  It's just so frustrating to people like me who just can't understand how anyone can believe in such ridiculousness.  I know its not their fault, they are genetically predisposed to this condition.   I've said it before and I'll say it again, I just cant wait until they invent a cure.