This post is universally regarded as the best, should any employer want to get a gist of my communication style.

To the dozen or so that read and commented regularly, thanks. I am going to start up another blog shortly, focusing on personal finance, the writing of my book, and the setting up of my new home. I plan to do more to increase readership than I ever felt I needed to here, which was more of a private conversation among friends.

It will be located here, though don't go there now as it is not yet even under construction. Look for it toward the beginning of the year.

Thanks to everyone, you're all the bomb-bigidees!

And a NASA study reported Thursday in the journal Science found that an important counter-balance to warming — sunlight blocked by volcanic gases, dust, pollution and other aerosol particles — appears to have weakened.

Didn't we hear forever that we needed to cut our aerosol usage? We did that, and now we get global warming because there aren't enough particles in the air. Shouldn't people worry that trying to prevent global warming might cause some other catastrophe?

This is one of the environmentalist's biggest problems. We live in a huge global ecosystem, and they keep picking bits and pieces to focus on. However, like they've always told us, the butterfly effect effectively prevents us from predicting whether any particular action we take is going to be better than any particular inaction.

I've heard it posited that we are actually in the middle of an ice age and that global warming is the only thing keeping the glaciers from covering huge swathes of land. I don't put a lot of credence into that theory, but the bigger point is that environmentalists, and the global warming fanatics in particular, keep wanting to flip climate switches when they truly have no idea what the ramifications will be.

If we turn off all the coal-fired power plants, will that cause the above problem to get even worse, causing even more global warming? Who knows. I for one would like to keep the electricity flowing so I can turn on whichever I need, my heater or my air conditioner.

On top of that, when I was young, light, and (with no gray in my hair) in the best shape of my life while running track, I never did more than around 8 miles at a stretch. Track and cross-country at the high school level while I was running never topped out at more than 5k (3.1 mile) races. Doing any kind of distance was more for training and endurance.

So when I started actual training for the half-marathon back in January, I set my goal time (which you need to put into your registration form, due to the 20,000+ people who will run the Country Music Marathon) at a near-walk time of 3 hours even (13:45 mile pace). Well, part of that was trying to help motivate someone else who wanted me to run with her, and part of it was a safety net, because I was pretty sure I could at least shuffle along at that pace and finish.

However, my training has gone surprisingly well (for an old guy), and I jogged 10.5 miles (!!) yesterday at just under 10:00 mile pace (just under 1:44). Yes, more than 10 miles without stopping, and yes, I hurt pretty badly today, but proud. I continue to be amazed at the resilience of the human body, as it generally does most of what one asks it to. I started training at around 3 miles and 11:00 mile pace at the beginning of January and now I can run more than 10 miles at a faster pace. That's pretty cool! My new goal for the 13.1 mile butchery of my body is 2:12, or 10-minute pace for the entire distance. With the crowds that might be a little high, but even if I miss it by a minute or 3 (or 10 even), I'm not one of those who dwells on it as some sort of a loss (like many, many runners would!). And the lovely and talented Sara Evans, one of my favorites, is putting on the post-race concert, which should make it all worth while!

The race is on April 28, and I have 3 more 10+ mile runs between now and then, and a bunch of 6 milers, and even a couple of 5k races just to keep myself interested. With luck I'll make it to the big day healthy and under 200 for the first time since 1999. (One of the side benefits of training is the stone plus one pounds I've lost so far)

Mileage will still vary, but the tests will reduce estimated city mpg by 12%, on average, and highway mpg by 8%, according to the EPA. Hybrids' fuel economy is likely to get a haircut of up to 30% for city driving and 20% for highway.

More political correctness gone wild in America.

I am currently reading a virtual reality/fantasy written by Tad Williams called Otherland and it makes me think China may actually be ahead of the curve. Internet usage will only get more immersive in the next 50 or 100 years, and I can easily see people reacting (something at this point I reflexively disagree with) with full-blown interventions on a large scale as it begins to replace the 'real world' to a larger and larger extent. Teens (and many Blackberry toting adults) are already connected 24/7 and we are only at the beginning of the Digital Age. When we get to the Cyber age (shortly) where we experience true sensory input through VR devices (for lack of a better term), things will get a lot more dicey. Unless the Singularity gets us first! (That is a must-read for all true wannabe technophiles and geeks)

At this point I didn't have much choice, as I got whacked with over 1400 spam comments over the weekend, which I am still in the process of deleting. Although Tammy and I have found a variety of interesting and creative websites, most of them would offend your average Methodist!

Sorry!

Still, I found this account of what sounds like a huge victory in Iraq a little one-sided. In the first paragraph the author presents his lede:

Accounts of the bloody battle near Najaf have produced more questions than answers, raising doubts about Iraqi security forces' performance and concern over tensions within the majority Shiite community.

Okay, so my doubts about the Iraqi security forces are supposed to be raised. However, later on in the story, we find that with US and British help, they captured 650 enemy combatants, and killed 300. The Iraqi security forces lost only 11, 30 wounded, and there were 2 Americans dead when their helicopter was shot down.

So, let me try and understand this. The good guys kill the bad guys at a 30 to 1 ratio, and disable them on a 100 to 1 ratio, and we are supposed to have our doubts raised? How about this as a more accurate title: 'With US support, Iraqi Security forces devastate terrorist militia' or 'Enemy militia has worse odds than longshot in Kentucky Derby.'

Is it possible the Iraqi's let the group assemble so they could all be killed or caught in one fell swoop, as it sounds like happened? It is possible that intelligence agents had this on their radar for awhile, and the media was just not informed. Who knows. All I can say to the folks, Iraqi, American and British, who participated in this battle is that you kick serious Soldier of Heaven buttocks.

I'm not sure what the reporter expected. With near a thousand enemy combatants, this was a battle larger than many in history, and should be expected to take more than a few resources, and time. The fact that the good guys came out of it with (relatively) few losses is good news and should be a source of pride for our armed forces and those Iraqis they trained.

Let's hope it is as good (or better!) than the original!

I actually have his copy of the game at my house; I keep hoping someday to do it in place of a regular gaming session. Maybe I can convince Mama and Little B (and my honey!) to give it a whirl!

Actually, let's sign up and at least try this. It can be pre-ordered Feb 1 and the beta characters can be rolled over (very unusual, and if I had to guess, they could be sold on the release date for a bunch if one chose).

Another interesting nuclear-related article here.