s n a p p e r h e a d

This Is How We Do It

Five mile hike and we feel alright
Both feeling hearty up on the mountain
Take my kleen kanteen and sip it up
Cecil O. Zonk jump along the path
Parading together and we're hummin'
Birds 'n the breeze cry, "Zonkey's coming!"
It feels so good in my woods today
With chitterin' squirrels and butterfly play
Flash-glimpsing thru the leaves and needles
Kitt ya oughtta pad on up to th' shade
So lift your nose and throw up your tail
Me all I meow'z my trekkin' partner says:
          Kinda jazzed and it's all because (this is how we do it)
          State forest does it like nowhere else (this is how we do it)
          We—my hikin' feline and I—will beeline (this is how we do it)
          Venture back to this woodland track 'cause (this is how we do it)

REPLAY by Ken Grimwood - Book Review (☆☆☆☆☆)

This speculative fiction novel combines the perfect blend of what-if from Groundhog ~~Day~~ quarter century, with the clean pacing and suspense of The Time Traveler's Wife (book not film). Soft science fiction fans will not be disappointed because Ken Grimwood deftly dangles the bet-you-know-what'll-happen-next bait followed by several successful surprises.

I enjoyed the story enough to give it my highest rating because I recall almost all of the key American events which happened between 1963 and 1988. However, the downfall of a story which leans as heavily on a specific country's historical events as REPLAY does, is that it gradually loses its audience. Consequently, I don't recommend it to anyone born after 1970 (unless they are history/SF buffs or love period-pieces)...readers born between 1970 and 1980 will rate it four-stars, between 1980-1990, three stars, et cetera.

I suspect this novel will become a shitty movie someday soon (I'm a bit surprised it hasn't already). Just like many books of this type, the success of the plot is based on the empathy we slowly gain watching the world go by through the main character(s) eyes. Films rarely succeed in relating "over a long period of time" to their audiences. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (the film, not Fitzgerald's short story) attempted to accomplish this feat...and bored most of its audience while doing so. There are exceptions. Robert Zemeckis's Forrest Gump (a bad book turned into a great screenplay) is the first example I can think of. If someone had the patience and skill to Gumpize REPLAY and could find the perfect 28 year-old everyman-character actor who is not a comedian (who must capture the two-and-a-half decades between college freshman and middle age; make us love him, feel sorry for him, hate him, and eventually love him again)...I picture ....ahhh.... nobody comes to mind. Which is why this hypothetical film will be made out of pure suckage.

Dear fuzzy-headed faces from prestigious places,

          Please stop dumbing-down your [specific area of scientific expertise] to coloring book level. I'm really sorry [name of college or university] doesn't pay enough for you to disregard all those enticing offers from [television channel] but every time you recite from a script written to be understood by [target audience] you inflict excruciating pain in my brain.
   I know. Brains don't actually have pain receptors. But, when watching [video of gravity tests in a testosterone-laden common-sense-free environment] I experience (real-to-me) empathetic groin pain and I feel a similar pain inside my skull when I watch you transmogrify [complex theorem or formula] to the level of SeeDickAndJaneRun.

Because specifics are better than vague analogies:

• Tweedle Dee, aka Brian Richmond, The George Washington University (NOVA, Becoming Human minutes 2:28 thru 3:00) - his explanation of a few theories why quadrupedal protohumans became bipedal: "...they stood up to be able to see over tall grass...they stood to be able to pick fruits off of the low branches of trees...(or)...to cool more efficiently so that we don't have as much sun beating on so much of our body."
          • Tweedle Dum, aka Daniel Leiberman, Harvard University (NOVA, Becoming Human minutes 3:00 thru 4:40) - his favorite opinion why quadrupedal protohumans became bipedal: "...the most compelling hypothesis is that it saved us energy."

These two idiots bruised my frontal lobes. Their few seconds of Discovery Channel fame only proved one thing: neither of them actually understands natural selection.

In a muddled attempt at simplicity, this NOVA episode completely fails to explain natural selection and offers information as true, which is the exact opposite of the truth. The show paints a picture that six million years ago, in the middle of protoAfrica (with the environment in flux and jungles becoming savannahs)...for reasons we can only guess at...a protochimpanzee stood on its hind legs and, subsequently, passed that ability to constantly walk upright to its progeny.

The fiction—like that of so many television shows based on psudo- and/or fuzzy-science—is relating that the reason/desire to walk upright preceded our distant ancestor's ability to do so. But when somebody from [prestigious place of higher learning] says, "they stood up in order to..." how can we interpret it otherwise?

What actually happened? How did a few of the little ancient monkeys who walked on four legs many millions of years ago eventually walk on only their two hind legs? The same way every gradual evolutionary change occurred in every living entity since the beginning of life. It happened by mistake. Zillions upon Trillions of miniscule beneficial mistakes. The same number (or more) of non-beneficial mistakes also (must've-probably) occurred, but any of those mistakes (those which don't improve their possessor's chance of procreation) are useless in evolutionary terms and lead to extinction.

One quadrupedal protohuman gave birth to a malformed baby with a slightly misshaped pelvis (I'll call her Miss Takè). Her pelvis was a bit too flat, too horizontal...and all the quadrupedal kids at school teased little Takè because she wasn't very good at reindeer games; but she was able to survive long enough to procreate and pass along that genetic error because she was [reason for not dying...including being lucky]. She had a fifteenth cousin twice removed with a slightly bent thumb which made swinging from branches a little harder than normal, but she always won at thumb-war; and her imperceptibly encephalitic and slightly taller great-great-great grandson (who could never peek over a log without his forehead being seen when playing hide-n-seek) became a great hunter because of his above-average eyesight...and his eighteenth son from his fifteenth mate (who happened to be distantly related to thumb-war cousin) was taller-still but he happened to have less body hair, hated the winter, and walked a long distance in order to live in a warmer place...ad infinitum...modern man.

          South Park's Mrs Garrison's grasp of the theory of evolution is more accurate. The fact that Trey Parker and Matt Stone are more capable than NOVA at explaining natural selection makes me giggle-cringe (but inflicts no pain in my gulliver).

re-posted/edited in 2020

Not the Best Way to Start a Day at the Beach

Low tide. About a half-mile from the beach access road—the closest people are more than 200 meters off—I swing a U-turn a bit too high off the wet-packed sand, intending to park facing the ocean. Somewhere in that sentence there should have been a descriptive adverb...a 'stupidly' or at the very least a 'thoughtlessly'.

I knew I was farged the moment I lost forward momentum, but we took a few minutes to insure it was so before calling a tow truck. Twenty minutes later the guy hooked up, pulled me forward ten feet, and gave us the bill. It cost slightly more than a dollar an inch.

Is there a combo-adverb for extremely stupid and very costly?