Let it snow.

So there was the dire prediction of a massive, record breaking snowstorm for the east coast, one that would cripple the region from Philadelphia to Maine,  New York shut down the subway, curfews were ordered, and the entire region ran out of milk, bread, cigarettes, and beer.  No doubt cancellations drove people out of work.

And....oops....Philadelphia got 2 inches of the foot they thought they'd have, New York got 9 of the promised 27 inches.  And the weather service apologized for the error and explained how hard it is to predict such things.

Understood.

The models used to compute such things depend on complex calculations, analysis of historic patterns, and extension of what happened before into the future.  Computer wizards, engineers, meteorologists, geniuses of all stripes pour their magic into computers to calculate the future and, voila, each comes up with a different story, none of which happen.

Earth systems are huge, complex, chaotic, and random.  What appears as cause and effect is often not, what appears to be linear usually isn't.

And so, if all of the science with tangible, known, fact-based, observed events in certain history produces vastly differing predictions, most of which are wrong even though they are all based on the same observations, how in the world do we think we can look backwards and make accurate assumptions of what happened in the earth system thousands, or millions or years before the observable past?

We throw away as "fable" the only written record of contemporary observers from the origins of the world we know (the Bible) in favor of the "smarter" science that presumes to know, understand, and calculate facts...the same science and basis as those who can't tell you what is going to happen within hours of an earth system event, whether a snowstorm, a volcanic eruption, earthquake, or seasonally average temperature.  We throw the truth away and throw money at those who claim they can prove it wrong.

We put our faith in that which continues to prove itself wrong rather than that which has an unchanging history of accuracy.

How smart are we really?

Red and Yellow, Black and White....

On a telephone survey the other day I was asked to give my "ethnic identity".  I said "American".  The lady said that is not a choice, I explained it is what I choose, and she went on to the next question dismissing me.  ( it'd be interesting to see what she wrote in her notes about what she thought about me...)

There is something made nowadays about the demise of the "white majority".  I might have these numbers slightly off, but I believe it is accepted that by around 2018 or so the US population under 25 will not have a white majority, and that by around 2030 or so the entire population will be that way.  It belies changing voter demographics and therefore new political winds.

So, why might this be?

I have thought about something that might make this less relevant, and might actually make this "fact" less valid.

Over the last 30-40 years we have undergone a shift in the attitude toward interracial marriage.  Before this shift it was unacceptable (in fact, in some places illegal) for white people to marry black people.  This extended somewhat to other "races", such as Oriental, and some to Hispanics as well.

Nowadays there is no limitation, and though there might be some lingering attitudes against it, the vast majority of Americans see no limits to the marriage between races or people groups.

Interesting, though, is a continuation of the past practice that was parallel to the prohibition of interracial marriage.  I don't know where it began, but it was certainly true that during segregation times, the determination of what "color" a person claims is set by a norm that if, for example, a black and white couple have a baby, the baby is automatically black.  If you see a black and white couple, I'd be surprised if you could find a single instance where the baby is identified as white. Today, there is a determination that if a person is 1/16th Native American (your great-great grandfather was Native American), then you are Native American.

What is most interesting to me about this fact, is that these "norms" were put in place to sustain segregation, yet in today's integrated "color blind" society, we accept them as the standard to measure our racial identity.

It seems to me that the erasure of the limits on interracial marriage are significant in the shrinkage of the "white majority".  It seems it is not equally valid to argue that the growth of the formerly minority populations should significantly affect this fact.  The real fact is that the identity of racial groups per se is becoming less distinct, because a child of a black and white couple is actually neither black or white, they choose their identity rather than have one by unavoidable fact.  Their "black" genes will have no greater impact on their offspring's genetics than their "white" genes.

A better step in this evolution of equality-for-all would be to have no recognition for color, or race.  Our American Melting Pot took a real step forward in the erasure of interracial marriage limits, so why don't we implement the result by having a new "ethnic identity" choice to check "American"?

Seems logical to restart at the beginning, so it is today.

Started with a familiar reading from Genesis and Luke, both starts, both filled with God's grace.  Learned of a friend's return home after heart surgery, a new beginning for him.

Maybe this new beginning will see me catch up with posts I've been meaning to make.

Hopefully I won't read this next year this time and wonder where the time went.