My last personal battle, that is. Not literally, of course: life never ceases to be a struggle, and I'll continue to strive, sin, fail, and fall as long as I live. What I mean is that I'm facing the last major barrier in changing from who I was to who I'm becoming--that is, in getting my life back on track and being the man I was meant to be.
And that battle is in regards to my work. Specifically, my writing.
I don't understand why, but I have some kind of block or deep-seated subconscious aversion to doing the thing which I know I was put here to do, and which I know I'm good at. And I actually like writing, creating, and imagining. Well-I guess, like Dorothy Parker, what I actually love is having written. But I just can't seem to settle my mind down, focus, and get it done. I'll do anything, rather than write. Literally anything, including nothing at all: I'll sit staring at the wall to avoid actually writing.
So, I'm committing myself to overcoming this. I don't really understand it--whether there's some kind of psychological block or avoidance mechanism due to fear of failure, self-doubt, or maybe even fear of success; or whether it's just laziness, lack of focus and discipline, and procrastination; or whether it's some form of ADD or some symptom of stress and anxiety. Whatever it is, I'm turning both my prayers and my efforts to overcoming it, and doing the work God created me for and called me to.
As part of that process, I'm going to be posting some of what I write here, as a way to motivate myself and keep myself accountable. That is, there's an element of instant gratification in posting it here, as opposed to writing and then tucking it away safely in my notebook or computer where no one will ever see it, or at least not until some vague point in the indefinite future; and, now that I've told you I'm going to be doing this, I've got to follow up on it. You are welcome not to read it if it bores you: it's more about me getting it done than wanting or needing any kind of readership or feedback (although if you want to read and comment, that's fine too).
Thursday, December 29, 2016
Wednesday, December 28, 2016
Thoughts on Starting the AT in Winter
I've set my start date for the Appalachian Trail for the first or second week in February. Exact date TBD.
Advantages:
1) I'll get a good head start on the crowds. And, being ahead of them, won't have to deal with the trashed conditions that they reputedly leave in their wake.
2) I'll have extra time to take an easier pace for the sake of my injuries, and still get to Maine in time (Mt. Katahdin, the northern end of the trail, closes on October 15th).
3) I'll avoid some of the worst heat by doing the southern portions before summer.
Disadvantages:
1) It will be cold.
2) I'll have to carry a heavier pack during the earlier stages. Because it will be cold.
3) It will put me in the highest elevations, in the Smokies, in early spring, where apparently, according to all the trail wisdom I've been able to find, it will be cold.
However, since one of my principal goals is to complete the final stages of my weight loss, the cold will actually work to my advantage. Colder temperatures mean more calories burned, as does extra weight carried.
Also, I like a challenge. In case you didn't already figure that out about me. I'm actually looking forward to climbing some of those frozen, windswept mountains above the treeline. I see it as a complement to my trek through the Florida swamps. Next I need to plan a hike through the desert, so I will have conquered all the types of challenging terrain the country has to offer. Hm...maybe a PCT through-hike next? And then maybe a snowshoeing journey through someplace wide and flat and really cold.
No need to worry about me though: I've bought plenty of winter gear. A 5 degree sleeping bag, silk underwear, two layers of wool, an outer layer of down, and a waterproof, windproof gore tex shell layer. Even got myself a pair of crampons (strongly recommended by previous winter AT hikers) so I don't slide off a mountain, and ski goggles so I don't get blinded by bad weather and get lost. I'll end up carrying most of it most of the time, but those few times I do use it, it will be essential. Better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it. Especially when you're talking about gear for staying alive in the cold.
Most of the time, while I'm walking, I'll only be wearing the light merino wool layer under my regular clothes, plus the gore tex if it's wet or windy; overheating is a greater concern while I'm moving than hypothermia. The rest of it is for after I stop. Climbing hills and carrying a pack, you sweat even when it's cold, and that plus fatigue equals getting chilled very quickly. So you have to carry a dry set of warm things to change into, plus you need much more insulation when you're sedentary in camp (and the temperature drops at night), including a dry change of hat, gloves, and footwear. So for camp, I have the silk liner layer, expedition-weight wool, and a down jacket and primaloft pants, over which I can wear the gore tex again if I need to, along with down booties and super-thick mountaineering socks. I also bought the extra cold weather shell for my hammock, and a merino wool sleeping bag liner. And if it gets ridiculously cold, I'm carrying two space blankets; there's this thing you can do where you put them over and under the hammock to reflect your heat back in.
Yeah, it sounds like I'm preparing for an expedition to the arctic. But not really: the stuff I've got is much lighter than what you'd wear someplace really cold, like Antarctica or Mt. Everest, or even far north like Canada. Here's the thing, though: winter is still winter, even in the South, and it gets cold enough to be seriously dangerous up in the mountains, even the relatively low Appalachians. We're talking about single-digit temperatures fairly regularly at night, and possibly sub-zero on occasion. And being stuck out in that kind of cold without adequate warm gear, in addition to being dangerous and potentially deadly, is just plain miserable. I speak from experience. Most of us have never been more than a few minutes' walk from somewhere heated and sheltered when it's cold: even if we're out away from buildings, we have our cars to retreat to, and to get us back to safety. But when you're outside all day and all night, every day, hours from shelter or even the nearest road, you have to plan for the worst and be prepared for any kind of weather you can realistically expect for wherever you are. So I'm going prepared for anything down to temperatures of ten or twenty below when I'm camped, and heavy snow and strong winds while I'm moving. If it gets worse than that, I'll have to get off the trail: bringing along arctic parka and snowshoes just isn't practical (although people who hike the northern sections of the AT in winter do routinely take those things).
In other news, the VA has very kindly scheduled me for a consult with a plastic surgeon, to repair the damage left by my weight loss. I am surprised but gratified; they are, after all, always on us about losing weight. So once I get back from my hike, having lost ALL the remaining fat, I'll be able to finally and totally put that part of my life to rest. The surgery will not only fix my skin, but will involve liposuctioning the adipose cells, which never otherwise go away (they only shrink; which is why it is so hard for formerly fat people to keep it off: the fat cells are just waiting there to start storing calories again.)
I have no intention nor desire to ever go back to eating the way I did which got me fat. But it will be an enormous relief to be able to just eat healthy and exercise, and not have to endlessly worry about every single calorie for the rest of my life because my body is constantly fighting against me and trying to get fat again. I would like to actually live, and not have that be the main focus of my existence.
Advantages:
1) I'll get a good head start on the crowds. And, being ahead of them, won't have to deal with the trashed conditions that they reputedly leave in their wake.
2) I'll have extra time to take an easier pace for the sake of my injuries, and still get to Maine in time (Mt. Katahdin, the northern end of the trail, closes on October 15th).
3) I'll avoid some of the worst heat by doing the southern portions before summer.
Disadvantages:
1) It will be cold.
2) I'll have to carry a heavier pack during the earlier stages. Because it will be cold.
3) It will put me in the highest elevations, in the Smokies, in early spring, where apparently, according to all the trail wisdom I've been able to find, it will be cold.
However, since one of my principal goals is to complete the final stages of my weight loss, the cold will actually work to my advantage. Colder temperatures mean more calories burned, as does extra weight carried.
Also, I like a challenge. In case you didn't already figure that out about me. I'm actually looking forward to climbing some of those frozen, windswept mountains above the treeline. I see it as a complement to my trek through the Florida swamps. Next I need to plan a hike through the desert, so I will have conquered all the types of challenging terrain the country has to offer. Hm...maybe a PCT through-hike next? And then maybe a snowshoeing journey through someplace wide and flat and really cold.
No need to worry about me though: I've bought plenty of winter gear. A 5 degree sleeping bag, silk underwear, two layers of wool, an outer layer of down, and a waterproof, windproof gore tex shell layer. Even got myself a pair of crampons (strongly recommended by previous winter AT hikers) so I don't slide off a mountain, and ski goggles so I don't get blinded by bad weather and get lost. I'll end up carrying most of it most of the time, but those few times I do use it, it will be essential. Better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it. Especially when you're talking about gear for staying alive in the cold.
Most of the time, while I'm walking, I'll only be wearing the light merino wool layer under my regular clothes, plus the gore tex if it's wet or windy; overheating is a greater concern while I'm moving than hypothermia. The rest of it is for after I stop. Climbing hills and carrying a pack, you sweat even when it's cold, and that plus fatigue equals getting chilled very quickly. So you have to carry a dry set of warm things to change into, plus you need much more insulation when you're sedentary in camp (and the temperature drops at night), including a dry change of hat, gloves, and footwear. So for camp, I have the silk liner layer, expedition-weight wool, and a down jacket and primaloft pants, over which I can wear the gore tex again if I need to, along with down booties and super-thick mountaineering socks. I also bought the extra cold weather shell for my hammock, and a merino wool sleeping bag liner. And if it gets ridiculously cold, I'm carrying two space blankets; there's this thing you can do where you put them over and under the hammock to reflect your heat back in.
Yeah, it sounds like I'm preparing for an expedition to the arctic. But not really: the stuff I've got is much lighter than what you'd wear someplace really cold, like Antarctica or Mt. Everest, or even far north like Canada. Here's the thing, though: winter is still winter, even in the South, and it gets cold enough to be seriously dangerous up in the mountains, even the relatively low Appalachians. We're talking about single-digit temperatures fairly regularly at night, and possibly sub-zero on occasion. And being stuck out in that kind of cold without adequate warm gear, in addition to being dangerous and potentially deadly, is just plain miserable. I speak from experience. Most of us have never been more than a few minutes' walk from somewhere heated and sheltered when it's cold: even if we're out away from buildings, we have our cars to retreat to, and to get us back to safety. But when you're outside all day and all night, every day, hours from shelter or even the nearest road, you have to plan for the worst and be prepared for any kind of weather you can realistically expect for wherever you are. So I'm going prepared for anything down to temperatures of ten or twenty below when I'm camped, and heavy snow and strong winds while I'm moving. If it gets worse than that, I'll have to get off the trail: bringing along arctic parka and snowshoes just isn't practical (although people who hike the northern sections of the AT in winter do routinely take those things).
In other news, the VA has very kindly scheduled me for a consult with a plastic surgeon, to repair the damage left by my weight loss. I am surprised but gratified; they are, after all, always on us about losing weight. So once I get back from my hike, having lost ALL the remaining fat, I'll be able to finally and totally put that part of my life to rest. The surgery will not only fix my skin, but will involve liposuctioning the adipose cells, which never otherwise go away (they only shrink; which is why it is so hard for formerly fat people to keep it off: the fat cells are just waiting there to start storing calories again.)
I have no intention nor desire to ever go back to eating the way I did which got me fat. But it will be an enormous relief to be able to just eat healthy and exercise, and not have to endlessly worry about every single calorie for the rest of my life because my body is constantly fighting against me and trying to get fat again. I would like to actually live, and not have that be the main focus of my existence.
Sunday, December 11, 2016
Nisi Dominus - Cum Dederit
Except the Lord build the house, they labour in vain that build it:
except the Lord keep the city, the watchman waketh but in vain.
It is vain for you to rise up early, to sit up late, to eat the bread of sorrows:
for he giveth to his beloved even in his sleep.
Lo, children are an heritage of the Lord:
and the fruit of the womb is his reward.
As arrows are in the hand of a mighty man;
so are children of the youth.
Happy is the man that hath his quiver full of them:
they shall not be ashamed,
but they shall speak with the enemies in the gate.
-- Psalm 127
Saturday, December 10, 2016
T-rex DNA
I'm watching this documentary about the woman who found blood cells, soft tissue, and DNA in Tyrannosaur bones. Of course the "scientific community" says that's impossible. One "scientist" even said, "I don't care what the data says, it's simply not possible," which pretty much sums up what's wrong with the whole crew of them.
As she's discussing this, Dr. Schweitzer says that she thinks DNA is much hardier than anyone ever believed. But I have an alternative hypothesis: the fossils aren't as old as you're assuming. Every culture on earth has stories, art, and histories of giant, terrifying lizard-things. And when we dig in the ground, we find the bones of giant, terrifying lizard-things. 2+2=4.
So, for example, here's a passage from the Bible; Job 41, to be exact:
The top one is a saltwater crocodile skeleton. The bottom is, obviously, a Tyrannosaurus Rex. Imagine the Tyrannosaur living amphibiously in deep water, like the crocodile, hunting as an ambush predator, like the crocodile. That would explain its huge back legs and tiny front ones: the back legs were used to swim and to propel the T-rex out of the water to catch its prey, whereas the front ones were just for paddling. Like this:
This is just some very basic deduction: I'm not a scientist. What I'm saying is that the Scientists' pre-formed assumptions and prejudices are blinding them to the actual data. They're unable to form any conclusions or hypotheses that may be contrary to their dogmatically-held positions and intellectual idols.
Guys, your whole time-line is off. The theory that dinosaurs died out 65 million years ago, along with the entire system of extreme ages, was created because the scientists needed the time to be that long, in order for their Darwinist theories to be correct. It's all based on equations, and as anyone who's taken basic algebra should understand, an equation is only as accurate as the variables you plug into it. So, if you need your time periods to be millions of years, you start plugging in one of the variables until you get something that seems to work with the others. But it's basically guess-work. The same equation could work with much smaller numbers.
Does that mean the Earth is only 6,000 years old? Not necessarily. I believe that, in order to take the Bible as literally true, we have to assume that Man is only about 6,000 years old, because of the genealogies. But the Earth itself, and animal life, could be much older. But a truly scientific, unbiased view of the evidence reveals that there are many and major holes in the millions and millions of years theory. Remember the coelacanth?
I couldn't find a clip of the bit I wanted, but here's a taste of the documentary. The whole thing is available on Netflix, under the title "Dinosaurs: the Hunt for Life".
addendum: Here's another contender for the identity of Job's leviathan--Deinosuchus. This one is recognized as a water-dweller; he's basically a giant crocodile. I'd say a crocodile-like creature big enough to prey on T-rex would be scary enough to warrant the description given in Job. But, of course, they also are supposed to have been extinct millions of years before Man existed, as were all the other giant crocodilians in the fossil record, if "their" theories are correct.
As she's discussing this, Dr. Schweitzer says that she thinks DNA is much hardier than anyone ever believed. But I have an alternative hypothesis: the fossils aren't as old as you're assuming. Every culture on earth has stories, art, and histories of giant, terrifying lizard-things. And when we dig in the ground, we find the bones of giant, terrifying lizard-things. 2+2=4.
So, for example, here's a passage from the Bible; Job 41, to be exact:
Canst thou draw out leviathan with an hook? or his tongue with a cord which thou lettest down?Now, whether you believe in the Bible or not, this is literary evidence. If you're a Christian, then it's kinda important because it's God himself speaking. If you're not, it's still a record of some creature that the writer had direct knowledge of--it occurs in a list of real-world animals and their descriptions, not mythological or fanciful ones. So, with that description in mind, look at these two pictures:
Canst thou put an hook into his nose? or bore his jaw through with a thorn?
Will he make many supplications unto thee? will he speak soft words unto thee?
Will he make a covenant with thee? wilt thou take him for a servant for ever?
Wilt thou play with him as with a bird? or wilt thou bind him for thy maidens?
Shall the companions make a banquet of him? shall they part him among the merchants?
Canst thou fill his skin with barbed irons? or his head with fish spears?
Lay thine hand upon him, remember the battle, do no more.
Behold, the hope of him is in vain: shall not one be cast down even at the sight of him?
None is so fierce that dare stir him up: who then is able to stand before me?
Who hath prevented me, that I should repay him? whatsoever is under the whole heaven is mine.
I will not conceal his parts, nor his power, nor his comely proportion.
Who can discover the face of his garment? or who can come to him with his double bridle?
Who can open the doors of his face? his teeth are terrible round about.
His scales are his pride, shut up together as with a close seal.
One is so near to another, that no air can come between them.
They are joined one to another, they stick together, that they cannot be sundered.
By his neesings a light doth shine, and his eyes are like the eyelids of the morning.
Out of his mouth go burning lamps, and sparks of fire leap out.
Out of his nostrils goeth smoke, as out of a seething pot or caldron.
His breath kindleth coals, and a flame goeth out of his mouth.
In his neck remaineth strength, and sorrow is turned into joy before him.
The flakes of his flesh are joined together: they are firm in themselves; they cannot be moved.
His heart is as firm as a stone; yea, as hard as a piece of the nether millstone.
When he raiseth up himself, the mighty are afraid: by reason of breakings they purify themselves.
The sword of him that layeth at him cannot hold: the spear, the dart, nor the habergeon.
He esteemeth iron as straw, and brass as rotten wood.
The arrow cannot make him flee: slingstones are turned with him into stubble.
Darts are counted as stubble: he laugheth at the shaking of a spear.
Sharp stones are under him: he spreadeth sharp pointed things upon the mire.
He maketh the deep to boil like a pot: he maketh the sea like a pot of ointment.
He maketh a path to shine after him; one would think the deep to be hoary.
Upon earth there is not his like, who is made without fear.
He beholdeth all high things: he is a king over all the children of pride.
The top one is a saltwater crocodile skeleton. The bottom is, obviously, a Tyrannosaurus Rex. Imagine the Tyrannosaur living amphibiously in deep water, like the crocodile, hunting as an ambush predator, like the crocodile. That would explain its huge back legs and tiny front ones: the back legs were used to swim and to propel the T-rex out of the water to catch its prey, whereas the front ones were just for paddling. Like this:
This is just some very basic deduction: I'm not a scientist. What I'm saying is that the Scientists' pre-formed assumptions and prejudices are blinding them to the actual data. They're unable to form any conclusions or hypotheses that may be contrary to their dogmatically-held positions and intellectual idols.
Guys, your whole time-line is off. The theory that dinosaurs died out 65 million years ago, along with the entire system of extreme ages, was created because the scientists needed the time to be that long, in order for their Darwinist theories to be correct. It's all based on equations, and as anyone who's taken basic algebra should understand, an equation is only as accurate as the variables you plug into it. So, if you need your time periods to be millions of years, you start plugging in one of the variables until you get something that seems to work with the others. But it's basically guess-work. The same equation could work with much smaller numbers.
Does that mean the Earth is only 6,000 years old? Not necessarily. I believe that, in order to take the Bible as literally true, we have to assume that Man is only about 6,000 years old, because of the genealogies. But the Earth itself, and animal life, could be much older. But a truly scientific, unbiased view of the evidence reveals that there are many and major holes in the millions and millions of years theory. Remember the coelacanth?
I couldn't find a clip of the bit I wanted, but here's a taste of the documentary. The whole thing is available on Netflix, under the title "Dinosaurs: the Hunt for Life".
addendum: Here's another contender for the identity of Job's leviathan--Deinosuchus. This one is recognized as a water-dweller; he's basically a giant crocodile. I'd say a crocodile-like creature big enough to prey on T-rex would be scary enough to warrant the description given in Job. But, of course, they also are supposed to have been extinct millions of years before Man existed, as were all the other giant crocodilians in the fossil record, if "their" theories are correct.
Friday, December 9, 2016
Smartphone Analysis
So I'm setting up my new phone, and I decide to try a keyboard app which scans all my emails, searches, and text messages and then makes predictions based on my writing style. Once it's done its thing, I type the letter 'i' in the search bar, and the first suggestion it comes up with is "I love you". lol
Sunday, December 4, 2016
"You're why cavemen chiseled on walls."
This should have gone with my post about paleolithic art, but it didn't occur to me until later. This is exactly what I was trying to say.
Friday, December 2, 2016
Back on the Trail
I was idly browsing on REI the other day, and happened across the perfect backpack. I'd been thinking of getting one for a while, ever since my cross-continental hike ended prematurely, but it's really hard to find the right one for my size. Most non-military packs aren't made to accommodate my shoulder width or chest girth. Also, I dislike the bright colors civilian outdoor gear typically comes in. And it was marked way down, to less than a third of its original price.
So I figured, well, since I bought a new pack, I may as well get the rest of the lightweight gear I need, including the replacement for the tent that was destroyed in the storm my last night on the trail (I went with one of these nifty hammocks), and a new sleeping bag that weighs 1/4 what the army one I carried does. And, while I was at it, I figured I'd go ahead and get the thing I'd been looking on REI for in the first place, a super-cool featherweight titanium cook/mess kit and pretty much the smallest/lightest stove in the world which, not coincidentally, fits right inside the mess kit, along with its fuel canister.
And then I figured, well, since I've got all this new stuff, I may as well hike the AT.
I'm hoping to leave in late February or early March; I want to get a jump on the "bubble", when the bulk of other people start from Georgia in April. That'll mean I'll have some cold nights during the early part of my hike, but I'm getting extra insulating layers for my new hammock, which I can send home to save weight when the weather warms enough, along with a few clothing items.
Between my weight loss and the significantly lightened load, I'll be carrying well over a hundred pounds less than before. I think that, combined with my nifty new high-tech knee brace, will allow me to finish this time. Just to give you an idea of the old/new weight ratio, here are some of the major gear items:
Old
Empty Pack - 12 lbs.
Sleeping Bag - 10 lbs.
Tent, Poles, Stakes, and Sleeping Pad - 9 lbs.
Stove with fuel, Full Fuel Bottle, Mess Kit, Canteen Cup - 5.5 lbs.
New
Empty Pack - 5 lbs.
Sleeping Bag - 2.5 lbs.
Hammock with extra insulating layers for cold weather - 3.5 lbs.
Stove, Cook/Mess Kit. + 2 Fuel Canisters - 1.5 lbs.
So that's 24 pounds saved right there. That alone would make a major difference, and I'm going to try and save even more, and keep my total weight carried between 35 and 45 lbs., including food and water. I hike twice a week on the AT right now with 25, and don't even really feel the pack, so if I could come in at around 35 that would be ideal.
Empty Pack - 12 lbs.
Sleeping Bag - 10 lbs.
Tent, Poles, Stakes, and Sleeping Pad - 9 lbs.
Stove with fuel, Full Fuel Bottle, Mess Kit, Canteen Cup - 5.5 lbs.
New
Empty Pack - 5 lbs.
Sleeping Bag - 2.5 lbs.
Hammock with extra insulating layers for cold weather - 3.5 lbs.
Stove, Cook/Mess Kit. + 2 Fuel Canisters - 1.5 lbs.
So that's 24 pounds saved right there. That alone would make a major difference, and I'm going to try and save even more, and keep my total weight carried between 35 and 45 lbs., including food and water. I hike twice a week on the AT right now with 25, and don't even really feel the pack, so if I could come in at around 35 that would be ideal.
The main thing I need to find is a pet-sitter. Either someone to check in a couple of times a week and refill his food and make sure the house hasn't burned down, or a full-fledged housesitter.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)