hyphenated -
Tags


Blogroll
  • Kevin
  • Keith
  • Niraj
  • Justin
  • Lily
  • Andrew
  • Megan
  • Kat
    • Filed under

    family & friends

     
    May 17, 2009 8:56 PM
     

    one month

    One month ago today, I started this blog and it seems like an opportune juncture to reflect on my experience as a blogger thus far. I can relate to a few sentiments expressed by a fellow novice blogger in Ireland, namely identifying as an "outlier in the blogosphere" (among my friends, I think I'm the only blogger) and really enjoying the writing. 

    Kathryn recently asked me how I come up with ideas for posts. Since I started blogging, I've been conscious of how blogable the things that I read, hear, observe, and discuss are. Sometimes the most benign ideas end up as posts - I have a tendency to link current events and thoughts to memories and other references (in case you haven't noticed).  Also, I like thinking critically, telling stories, and writing. Consequently, keeping up with the blog hasn't proven difficult. 

    Actually, I've been jotting down ideas for future blog posts as they come to me and there are currently a few posts in the blog 'incubator' (stay tuned for a response to Kevin's post about education/schooling as well as for one on nostalgia). Some posts stay in the incubator longer than other as I develop and refine my ideas. 

    (As an aside, incubator as a metaphor is a bit more mainstream and suitable for describing my posts-in-waiting than the bizarre simile that occurred to me earlier today. The simile would only make sense to anyone who lived on a farm with hens and has seen what eggs look like before they are laid. Yes, the chicken has to be dead to do this.)

    In any case, I strive to keep the topics diverse and not rant too much. In line with my first post, I try to keep hyphenated interesting. Hopefully, I've succeeded thus far. The stats have been encouraging: over 400 views by 83 unique visitors from 7 countries. 

    (Another aside: My favorite piece of information from Google Analytics is that someone who was searching for information regarding bathroom vents was directed to my post about vermicomposting by Google. I doubt they found what they were looking for.)

    The comments I've received from friends and family, either on the site or in conversation, have also been encouraging. My initial assumption that my parents were more likely to read my blog than my tweets or my Facebook updates has been proven correct. Blogging has been rewarding on so many levels. I plan to keep it up for the months to come.

    Filed under  //   family & friends   science & technology  

    Comments [0]

    May 16, 2009 12:29 PM
     

    ode to hubble

    One thing that two of my father's hobbies have in common: they involve looking through magnifying devises at objects that are very small or very far away. John tried to engage me and Kathryn in his hobbies when we were kids, giving us the chance to peer through the binoculars or the telescope to partake in his excitement. 


    The binoculars were rather hopeless for the longest time - John would point out a bird sitting on a branch and pass me the binoculars to take a peek. More often than not, I wouldn't be able to align the binoculars with the bird and, rather than marveling at its beautiful plumage, I would get frustrated because all I saw was blurry branches and leaves. Needless to say, I didn't get very excited and bird watching was not added to my list of interests. 

    I do have some funny memories associated with my dad's passion for birds. I must have been about four years old when John heard the call of an oven bird. He proceeded to jump up, proclaim something to the effect of "An ovenbird!! I've never seen one of those!" before running to grab his binoculars and trying to locate the bird. My four-year-old self wondered what an ovenbird might look like - for John to be so excited it must be really neat. I proceeded to imagine a rather square bird reminiscent of a stove. Now that I know what an ovenbird looks like, I don't know if it was worth all the excitement.

    John's passion for astronomy proved to be more contagious, despite a rough initiation to the hobby. John set up his binoculars on a tripod (he hadn't purchased a telescope yet) to view the moons of a planet (I think it was Saturn but, since I was six at the time, I could be wrong). Once he had the planet in focus, he invited Kathryn and I to take a look. In my hurry to see what all the fuss what about, I tripped over one of the tripod legs and sent the binoculars crashing to the ground where they met their fate on a patch of ice. Oops. John was not happy, especially since we lived in a remote arctic community at the time - binocular repair shops were not part of the local economy.

    Despite that event, which I don't think I'll ever live down, I remained fascinated by the cosmos. Throughout elementary and high school, we lived in a rural area where star gazing was possible in the absence of much light pollution (with the exception of the northern sky where the erie orange glow of Montreal drowned out the stars). The Milky Way was visible on clear nights. Occasionally, I witnessed northern lights and shooting stars. Magical is probably the best word to describe those warm summer nights spent laying on the dewy grass listening to peeper frogs and coyotes while contemplating the insignificance of my existence in light of the vastness overhead... at least on the nights without many mosquitoes.

    One slow summer day when I was about 18, I was browsing the bookshelf for new reading material at my parent's place and picked up Stephen Hawking's A Brief History of Time and dove in. I admit to never finishing it (probably like most of the people who bought it), but I made it about halfway through and was impressed and engaged by the theories. A CEGEP course in astrophysics/astronomy and some additional extra-curricular reading also resonated with me. The thought that everything, absolutely everything, originated from a singularity 13.7 billion years ago (thank you, Wolfram Alpha ) still leaves me awestruck and feeling particularly insignificant.

    The motivation for this post was the recent news coverage regarding the beginning of the end for the Hubble telescope, which will remain operational until about 2014. The beautiful and humbling images obtained from the telescope over the years have left me awestruck time and again and probably can be attributed, along with my father's hobby, to my appreciation for the cosmos.


    Filed under  //   family & friends   science & technology  

    Comments [3]

    May 8, 2009 6:48 PM
     

    'birth'day

    Having recently celebrated my birthday and with Mother's Day coming up, I've been thinking about my family a lot lately, Elaine and Grandma in particular. As I get older, I recognize that my birthday is less about my getting older and more about my 'birth'day (as Elaine put it). She reminds me of when I was born: what the weather was like, what flowers were blooming, etc. - all the details that I can't remember despite being there too. 


    It seems like birthdays should be Mother's Day - an occasion to celebrate motherhood on the date when the mothering began. Maybe this only makes sense once the child is all grown up and doesn't mind sharing their birthday with mom. Perhaps the Mother's Day established by Hallmark should be valid for the first 18 years, at which point Mother's Day is replaced by 'Birth'Day - I'd be down with that.

    In any case, in the spirit of celebrating motherhood, I'd like to thank my mom for being ... my mom. Her strength, determination, support, and love have shaped who I am in a positive way. My childhood was less than conventional. Adolescent resentments have morphed into appreciation and respect. I'd also like to thank my grandmother for being an inspiration. Her ability to be open-minded, honest, gracious, and kind are things that I admire about her. I'd be hard-pressed to find a better role model. 

    Filed under  //   family & friends  

    Comments [3]

    April 25, 2009 11:39 AM
     

    you don't win friends with salad

    An article on The Walrus magasine website, examining the elevated status of meat (in relation to vegetables and all things soy) in society, resonated with me. In short, the article critiques so-called Meatatarianism and reminded me of the social critique so wonderfully embedded in my favorite episode of the Simpsons:


    In response to western society's obsession with meat, the author proposes the term 'Vegethusian' "to denote someone who doesn’t necessarily eat only vegetables, but who likes them a lot, and who refuses to buy into the idea that meat is somehow superior, more normal or more glamourous that plant-based foods".

    For years, I've been in an uncomfortable place when it comes to diet. I'm not a vegetarian, but I rarely eat meat and I only eat certain meats. The reason for the discomfort associated with my dietary restrictions (for lack of a better term) is that it's easy for me to come across as a hypocrite. Hypocrisy is not something I aspire to.

    The rationale for my reduced and refined consumption of meat is clear to me, but is complicated and, as a result, I spend a lot of time explaining what meat I do and don't eat to people in an effort to not seem hypocritical. Case in point: the other day at work, I was eating a sausage for my lunch. A confused look from one of my coworkers, who I think had me pegged as a vegetarian, resulted in having to explain that it was a lamb sausage and that I occasionally eat lamb because the rearing of lamb is less industrial than the production of other meats (e.g., it is typically raised outdoors in pastures).

    I base my decision not to eat much meat on less conventional reasons. It's not that I have issues with killing animals to eat them (I can't make that claim because there is photo evidence to the contrary).

    I grew up on a farm - animals were not pets, they were food in the making (my sister and I once named a rabbit 'Rabbit Stew' in an effort not to become too attached). Only after I moved to the city to go to CEGEP did I realize that not everyone had been to a butcher that actually did the butchering. Also, I like the taste of meat (the accidental consumption of a beef burger at a BBQ a couple of summers ago and my proclamation that it was the best veggie burger I ever had is proof of that) and I love seafood and fish (but won't eat farmed salmon).

    The reason I limit my intake of meat is rooted in my efforts to live more sustainably and was primarily motivated by my discovery that eating pork gives me migraine headaches - unless the pork is organic. Kind of scary. Now, I think a lot more about what I eat and I am amazed that people can be so comfortable dining without knowing anything about what it is that they're eating and where it's coming from.

    I don't think that using the term Vegethusian would help me explain my dietary restrictions and reduce the risk of being deemed a hypocrite. For now, I think I'll have to keep explaining the subtleties of my diet and referring people to The Omnivores Dilemma, a book that made me feel good about the fact that I haven't eaten at McDonald's in about 10 years.

    Filed under  //   family & friends   food   sustainability  

    Comments [0]

    April 20, 2009 6:03 PM
     

    wild parrots of telegraph hill

    When Kevin and I visited San Francisco in the summer of 2007 we did all the touristy stuff, including a visit to the switchbacks on Lombard Street. We were talking some photos when a very noisy flock of birds flew overhead and landed in a nearby tree. I am not a birder/birdwatcher (i.e., I don't carry field guides and binoculars everywhere) but my dad is and, whether I like it or not, if I see an unfamiliar bird I'm drawn to it and can't help wanting to know what it is. Thanks John. In any case, I discovered that the birds were parrots. Having no prior knowledge of parrots inhabiting San Francisco, I couldn't quite believe that I was observing parrots living wild in an American city. I took photos as proof:

       
    Click here to download:
    wild_parrots_of_telegraph_hill.zip (664 KB)


    Later in our trip, when perusing the shelves at the famous City Lights Bookstore, I discovered that a book had been written about the parrots. As a student with limited disposable income and way too much reading on my plate, I didn't buy the book. I did, however, recently borrow it from my friend Matthew and just finished reading it. The book was quite interesting.

    Some interesting facts:
    - The parrots are called cherry-headed conures when sold as pets (which is where the San Francisco population likely originated) and red-masked parakeets by ornithologists
    - They are originally from northwestern Ecuador and Peru
    - They successfully breed in San Francisco and they've been in San Francisco for many years
    - There was a species of parrots native to the US, but these were hunted to extinction by 1918
    - Telegraph hill is steep because soil was mined from the slopes for use as ballast in ships

    Most of these facts are from one chapter of the book. The rest focuses on the author's relationship with the parrots over several years. The story is very sweet and the book made learning about the parrots much more enjoyable than I imagine reading the Wikipedia entry would be. (There doesn't seem to be an entry about the parrots in San Francisco, hence I've taken the opportunity to promote a related product.)

    Filed under  //   books & art   family & friends   science & technology  

    Comments [0]

    April 19, 2009 11:41 AM
     

    the intersection of the sciences

    Is social science 'science'? Or, in more blunt terms, what are the
    merits of social science given its 'fuzzyness'? These are question
    that I've mulled over for over ten years, starting in CEGEP, when
    social science, health science, and pure and applied science were
    presented as distinct disciplines in the course catalogue. No one
    really talked about it, but it was pretty clear that some students in the
    pure and applied and health science realms perceived themselves to be
    enrolled in the 'important' and 'concrete' disciplines - destined
    to be engineers, doctors, and computer scientists. Indeed, amongst the
    'scientists', social science courses were viewed as easy courses taken
    to boost ones GPA. Beyond that, the merit of humanities courses was
    often discounted or ignored. Starting CEGEP, I was a 'scientist'
    taking 'real' science and math courses in the hopes of becoming an
    engineer.
     
    The most important thing I learned in CEGEP was that I don't like pure
    science enough to pursue it as a career. Sure, physics was interesting
    (I especially liked astrophysics and waves/modern physics) and
    chemistry was alright, but I despised calculus. I didn't get it and I
    didn't really want to. Seeing as calculus is an integral (no pun
    intended) component of an undergraduate degree in engineering, I
    started reconsidering my career path. Realizing that I really enjoyed
    my biology courses, I shifted gears from pure and applied science to
    health science. I also found that I quite enjoyed the social science
    courses I was taking to boost my GPA and compensate for my dismal
    grades in calculus.
     
    That's why I ultimately enrolled in the McGill School of Environment
    for my undergrad. The curriculum at the MSE was diverse, allowing
    students to take courses in a variety of disciplines. My transcript
    includes biology, anthropology, geography, economics, and religious
    studies courses. Most of the courses I completed had an environmental
    science focus and I graduate with a B.Sc.. Still a 'scientist'. A
    memorable debate with my mother (a social scientist) reminds me that,
    at that point in time, I remained stubbornly sure that, albeit being
    interesting, social sciences were 'fuzzy' and, as such, not really as
    worthy as 'science'.
     
    This debate continued through my Master's, where students from a
    variety of science and social science backgrounds converged to study
    Resource & Environmental Management. There were many heated
    discussions in my courses about the worth of social science as
    compared to pure science. I found myself in a new, slightly awkward
    position: My supervisor was an economist and - gasp! - I was
    conducting social science research. My graduate studies provided me
    with new perspective. With most of the 'scientists' conducting
    research based on imperfect models (models tend to rely on assumptions
    and incomplete data), I realized that 'science' can be pretty 'fuzzy'
    too. The quantification of the 'fuzziness' is the most important part.
    Uncertainty, error, risk, and sensitivity analyses help to anchor the
    findings of research in all realms.
     
    My views of social science and its merits have certainly evolved over
    the past ten years and, as an environmental manager, I am more aware
    of the importance of social science today than I ever have been in the
    past. Human behaviour counts for a lot. My favorite example: risk vs.
    uncertainty. So long as the risk, uncertainty, and discounting are
    misunderstood or ignored, decisions related to environmental issues
    will be misinformed. So many environmental issues are low probability,
    high magnitude, and long-term. If probability and risk are treated as
    synonymous and discount rates are too high (which they typically are),
    appropriate action is unlikely to be taken. Social science plays a key
    role in understanding how environmental issues are perceived and how
    these perceptions shape decision making. With this understanding,
    positive progress can be made more efficiently.
     
    This post was inspired by a recent article in the NY Times Magazine:
    "Why Isn't the Brain Green?". The author explains that "the [social science]
    research ... has the potential to improve environmental messages, policies
    and technologies so that they are more in tune with the quirky workings of our minds."

    Filed under  //   family & friends   science & technology  

    Comments [4]

    April 18, 2009 12:26 PM
     

    techvolution

    First, Gmail and Gchat. Then Facebook. Then Twitter. Now Blog. Natural
    progression?
     
    I'm not too sure about the first two. But I think that there is some
    relationship between joining Twitter and starting this blog. I'm an
    active Facebook user, but still weary of it and skeptical of the value
    it adds to my life. Kevin was using Twitter before he joined Facebook
    and I am just now understanding the advantages that Twitter offers
    over Facebook. These advantages (viewable without signing up, not
    automatically following followers, more potential to offer thoughts
    and information, etc.) are what make Twitter attractive to me and what
    got me thinking about blogging.
     
    Why start a blog? Sometimes 140 characters just aren't enough. I love
    writing. My parents are much more likely to read my blog than search
    for my tweets, follow me on Twitter, or friend me on Facebook (listed
    in decreasing order with respect to likelihood). To share what I'm
    thinking about things I'm reading, observing, or contemplating with
    those that are interested.
     
    So here I am. I'll try to keep it interesting.

    Filed under  //   family & friends   science & technology  

    Comments [5]