This year’s Blog Action Day subject is, “Climate Change”, and there are thousands of bloggers around the world writing in on this subject from all sorts of angles — support, refutation, complaints, issues, problems solutions.    But in the end, no matter what your understanding or opinion on the subject, dealing with climate change issues comes down to a moral issue over all of them, and I think all sides can agree on that point.

Whether or not climate change is taking place or not, and regardless of whether that change (if it exists) is drastic or not, we still are behooved to apply our advances in technology and industry to lessen our negative impact on the world around us.     When the industrial revolution began, factories and homes spewed completely unfiltered dirty coal smoke into the air without any concern for its impact on the world — but then again, the technology had not progressed to the point where doing something about this pollution was feasible.     And yet,  nowadays we have numerous technologies to prevent contamination of the earth and yet we do not always apply them, or we are too willing to fore go them in favor of a higher number on the corporate earnings report.

For us to possess the technology and resources to minimize our impacts and not do so is deplorable at best and downright evil at worst.   The exploitation of any resource by the human race has been generally frowned-upon by history in the past; will we be found in the future to have been apathetic about our responsibility to the planet that gave us so much?

Catastrophic climate change or fearmongering activist hype — which ever side of the battle, or area in between, that you plant yourself in this debate, the result is the same:   Should we not be doing better by the Earth since we clearly have the ability?

I think the answer by anyone involved is — or should be — a resounding, “Yes!”

Hay bales are not particularly sophisticated devices.    A bunch of mostly-dried plant material, scooped up and compressed into a brick, and tied up with some rough twine.     There are probably few items in the world that are less inspired or impressive.     However, despite its simplistic nature, it’s changed little over time because it gets the job done.  The bales get stacked, the animals get fed, and everyone’s happy (except, maybe, the hay itself).

Sometimes simplicity is the best solution in the long run.

I come from a long line of very down-to-earth farmers on both sides of the family.   I was born and raised riding across fields, hearing the squeal of pigs and lowing of cows in the near distance, and the various smells of the seasons drifting across the farm (some of them more pungent than others, of course).   While I didn’t choose the profession for myself, it still runs in my blood as a vocation that involves good, honest hard work, feeling independent and productive, and good people.

The farmers in my family are a resourceful bunch.   That is not to say that they are stingy or tight; if equipment is broken and truly needs replacement, something shiny will be soon to follow, much to the heartburn of their banker.    But they have never been adverse to using baling twine, fence wire, duct tape, or a few well-placed bolts and screws to bring the foundering building or machine back into usable service.

Last night I helped my father to unload 3 racks (~300 bales) worth of hay into his barn by means of a chain-driven conveyor that ran from the rack to the haymow.      This we do to prevent having to toss (yes, toss) all of these upward into the gaping door, a process I am rather unfond of, especially when I’m helping to do it.     About halfway into the first rack the damned thing up and broke, the chain flailing as the motor tried to move it without a top sprocket  to rotate around.    I lept from the rack and yanked apart the cord and extension and then waited as Dad gave it a look.

The conveyor is old — color: rust;  brand:  unknown;  volume:  loud;  default sound effect:  squeal.     But it works very well when it doesn’t break, so we had a vested interest in fixing it.   Plus, my ability to toss 80 pound bales over my head is severely wanting of late.

Dad hammered.   And he hummed.   And he pried, bent, shifted, wrenched, jammed, jimmied, fiddled, screwed and swore for about 10 minutes as he cajoled the sprocket back into the conveyor and back into commission.    A few tests, a few tweaks as we ran, and it’s practically as good as new, and all for the cost of some elbow grease and good old fashioned practicality.    We unloaded all three racks with no other problems except the fact that we were both covered in hay bits and desperately needed a good shower.

Sometimes the simple solution really is the best one.

Black Woman Thinks posted this quote from Epicurus today which I both love and dislike as it shows so much narrowness in our definitions of ${DEITY} and how it works.

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.

Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.

Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?

Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?“

My response is thus:

God is the watchmaker; we are simply a cog in the works as is everything. To have evil present and not mitigated is not malevolent, it is simply allowing the watch to tick as it must, for without evil, the watch cannot run.

On this Monday, when much evil can and will be present in all sorts of forms, what is your response to this puzzle, dear reader?

It amazes me how often we toss out casual utterances in the name of supposed social graces, when in reality, everyone knows it’s a farce.   “Hey,” I mutter to a coworker as we pass in the hallway, two ships in the daylight, captains concentrated on a task other than navigating the socially-charged waters.    “Hrmph,” comes the reply.    “How’s it goin’?”  I utter to the next one, even though we both know that I don’t expect there to be a real answer to it.    A nod is all I receive, and on we go, neither of us miffed by the experience but at the same time, wondering why we have to indulge at all.

I find this phenomenon most prevalent at work, where I know most of the people I cross paths with in the course of my day.   Of course, I’m working (in theory), so I’m not in the mood, the mindset, or the time frame to stop and have an involved chat and find out, really, how s/he is. But, at the same time, I feel like a complete twibber to walk past a person and not say…well, something, anything, rather than silence or some sort of avoidance.

The real wretch of the experience is the eye contact.    There are such varying degrees to which you can take it, but for a proper transaction to take place, you have to somehow subtly agree on the duration and intensity of your stare.    Remember — we’re not being verbal here, so it’s Body Language 101  for the win — if you’re lucky.     Do you lock eyes intensely or out-of-focus casually?   Do you try to be coy and give a twinkle or a sordid wink?  In my experience, the ladies in the office seem fairly receptive to a smiling glance whereas the men don’t take a wink to be a sign of cordiality, no matter how much joy I put into it.

Naturally, there are always the Violators, the ones who will go against the grain of what you are trying to accomplish with your brief acknowledgment.    They come in one of three forms, none of which will make your day any faster or accomplish anything but encouraging one of the parties to scamper off behind a trash can, weeping:

The Weirdo: Exchanging a look for too little of time will earn you a bashful title, as if you’re constantly turning away early on the eye-to-eye exchange, you look like the submissive sort.    This might be an acceptable situation to be in, say, a relationship (if you’re into that sort of thing), but passing in the hall you look like you might cry.     On the other end of this spectrum is the creepy guy that stares a little TOO long, way past the time you’ve defined with your body language as the, “casual glance period”, making everyone feel like something bad just happened or the salsa from lunch is about to repeat on you.    Or, as some women experience it, the guy that meets your eyes and then swiftly glances downwards at other vistas, if only to emphasize the fact that he’s noticed your eyes but not nearly as much as your boobs.

The Quirk: Second on the Violators list is the non-conventional person who answers a comment or a question with something meant to be quirky or unusual but comes off as being strange or odd.    “How’s it goin’?” someone might ask my boss.   “Livin’ the dream!” he replies, confident that he’s being unique — which he is, but it sets people aside when they hear it, much as if he had answered the question in some ribald fashion, like, “It’s going INTO MY PANTS!”      Nobody likes the clever ones.

The Conversationalist: Last but certainly not least troublesome of Violators is the Conversationalist.    One comment to this person as you pass in the hallway and you are STUCK — 15, 30, 50, 90 minutes later, your coffee cold, feet sore, and your brain fried into a small puddle of gasping protoplasm, you are released to go back to your cubicle and have a good cry, now knowing more about the love life of the Conversationalist than even Maury Povich would be able to extract.   These folks do nothing but interrupt the salmon on the way up the river.

Despite all these hazards that must be navigated, to say nothing of the standard act of meeting in the hallway, we still feel the need to do something as we pass on our way to the next location.     A nod, a slight wave, a finger-gun, a salute, a fist-bump, an eye-roll — we feel the need to somehow convey to each other that we see them and they’re there, but really — we’re just trying to work, ya know?

So, folks — how’s it goin’?

Of late I’ve become enamoured with a podcast called, “This I Believe“, which started back in the 1950s as a project to record audio files of people talking about what they really believed in the core of themselves; the beliefs that really mattered when it came down to the nuts and bolts of who they were.

The early recordings (currently being played on the podcast as a revival and fundraiser) are more formal than the modern ones.    They are more prominent people of the times, politicians, actresses, people of note, whereas the more modern you get, the more you get deeply personal recordings from any number of ordinary folk and celebrities alike.   Not all are old or wizened, but many are — I suppose by a later age, your beliefs have either cemented themselves — or stagnated.

It should be said here that in this context, “beliefs” not only encompass any religious beliefs, but also ones about the world as a whole — ethical and moral beliefs, ways of viewing the world, expectations of your fellow human, your ideas for the betterment of humanity and the world, and the pursuit of happiness, meaning, and fulfillment in this short life.

I was listening to a recording on the way home tonight and was musing about my own beliefs and whether or not I could even hope to start putting them down in some format that I could ever record on an “official” copy.   I suppose I have done that already, somewhat, both on my main website under my Beliefs section and here in this blog, under the entries marked by, “Controversies“, but I’ve only really gotten started.    I want to not only attempt to lay out my beliefs but to have them scrutinized, analyzed, and picked apart by the masses — in this, I feel, I can make them stronger, better, less instinctual and more logical, more meaningful to me as a person on a life journey.

I don’t know if this will actually accomplish what I am after or if, at the end of it all, I will know that I know more about particular aspects of my beliefs and less and less about other areas.    It is one of the great adages of philosophy that the more you know, the less you truly know, and the field of knowledge is truly never-ending in its scope.   The reality may be that at the end of the journey I find myself at the beginning, endlessly to revise my beliefs and understandings till the end of my days, never finding a true answer to any of it.   I may, in my efforts, simply be climbing Sisyphus‘ mountain.

To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day
To the last syllable of recorded time,
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life’s but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing. — Macbeth

How about you, dear and gentle reader?   If, given the chance to record your own audio file of your beliefs, or to write them down in a book, would you be able to?   How many beliefs would you say are “cemented” within your mind compared to all the “fluid” ones?   How do you develop and extend your beliefs during your life — or are they a static phenomenon in your life, something unchanging despite the years?

If you feel like sharing, let us all know how you process your own beliefs, whether they be religious, life, or otherwise.    Together, I think, we can better each other in this fascinating process of sorting ourselves out into a better mindset.