Well folks.. I have decided to write on the fitness craze that is of interest at least to us here in the United States by telling you my own personal tale of...."The Battle of the Bulge". I have mentioned here and on my Facebook page the amazing job that Luke has done with his interest in the BeachBody program. In the first 90 days he has lost over 70 pounds and reduced his body fat to a meager 7%. So when Barbara came home and announced that we were going on a 17 day diet to lose weight I agreed, of course, since there are only two of us and she was the cook. So for approximately the next 3 weeks I will report on the progress that I have made in this insane battle to do more with less.
First, I had to take stock of myself. Most people take a before and after picture. I considered that and immediately rejected the thought because there was no way to touch up the picture and flatter myself as motivation to keep on with this silly idea .....so I just decided to go with the numbers. At age 79 after both knee replacements and a double by-pass this didn't seem like a good idea but anyway... Onward and Upward
First step was the scale... ugly really ugly. The 'survey said' 267 pounds buck naked. Now that wouldn't be too bad if I were 6' 2" but unfortunately I am 5'2" with eyes of blue so I just knew that I had a long way to go and 17 days wouldn't do it. But I decided to be a good soldier and GO FOR IT. My body mass index would put a Texas steer to shame so I plain ignored whatever my % body fat would be. And I started day number 1.
Breakfast consisted of two eggs and an orange along with the juice of one half lemon. The eggs must have come from a pigeon or a bantam rooster at least but the lemon originally was of good size. I squeezed the lemon into a cup of green tea and it wasn't half bad... the half that was green tea that is. I followed that up with a cup of water and two cups of coffee with a little milk and a packet of Stevia. The rest of the day was green tea(3 more cups) and finally a cup of water before bedtime. That's 7 cups of liquid and that was as close as I got to the obligatory 8 cups. But ah then the lunch and dinner.
Lunch was a salad.... a wonderful medley of greens and reds and yellows and the like. But it seemed to be endless. I was lost in a forest of lettuce and fetta bits and other nameless items that must have tested Barbara's cullinary skills to the limit. But that was nothing compared to dinner.
The good news was a nice chunk of salmon. The bad new was those hairy green hunks of vegetables along side it. But with grit and determination and Barbara looking over at me from time to time I managed to get it down and turned around to look for mycongratulatory scoop of ice cream. Viola! nothing. Somehow I will survive.
Now on to the exercise program. Fortunately I decided to start with 3-pound weights. This seemed like a piece of cake since I used to work out with 15-pound weights and lift barbells in the 100-200 pound class. But that was 60 years ago. Thee pounders as it turned out were more than enough challenge. But the real obstacle was the treadmill.
I decided to start slow. I put the motor on the lowest setting and started up the platform. It was like a Texas gunfighter walking into town at high noon. After 5 minutes of this torture, I shut it down and realized that my legs had been really strained after years of sitting on my ... computer chair. I managed to burn 4 calories and progressed a whole .01 mile in that five minutes. So I decided to call it Day One and crawled upstairs on four limbs and immediately crashed.
The next day dawned with the sun shining and all that and I weighed myself. Yippee I had lost 2 and a half pounds. Somehow it seemed all worth it as I plodded down the stairs to another breakfast of eggs and mushrooms. (to be continued).
Thursday, March 3, 2011
Thursday, February 24, 2011
Guilty or Not
Hello again Folks. I have been out of town enjoying some down time with my friends in the Sabian Assembly. When I got back, I felt guilty about not writing something up in my Blog. So as I sat down to correct that and I reflected on the idea of Guilt or Guiltiness as the case may be. Where did that idea come from? Is it born in us or did we invent that concept perhaps to flagellate ourselves to better effort(whatever that may be). So I did some research.
The dictionary definition which was traditional sent me to the Bible and Numbers, chapter 5. And here there was the old idea of sin being a missing of the mark or a deviation from some standard. Moses was to instruct the priests who in turn elaborately laid the guilt on the sinner and extracted a material penalty from the sinner. Which incidentally became the property of the priest since after all, God could have nothing to do with material things.
Next I asked myself... is there any survival value to something like a sense of guilt? Because if there were survival value then the sense of guilt would be innate and it would have evolved over the millenia. But guilt, unlike fear, did not seem to have survival value. So I had to conclude that guilt represented a survival value only to the community and not necessarily to the individual. For example. If I stole something from some other man, or woman for that matter, it would give me pleasure or satisfaction of some sort. However, it would cause a sense of loss in the other person. Soooo the sense of guilt and the state of guiltiness appears to be a man-made concept to protect man's property.
While I had my nose in the Bible, I looked at the Ten Commandments as a whole. And I thought I saw a pattern. It appears that the first five commandments describe the existence and omnipetence of God and the second five describe the respect for man's property. In biblical times property consisted of a man's women, his children, his animals, his tents wagons and other equipment.
Curiously enough, in today's lexicon this concept extends to women, children, animals, the environment and the like. In other words a respect for the personality of all living things.
The dictionary definition which was traditional sent me to the Bible and Numbers, chapter 5. And here there was the old idea of sin being a missing of the mark or a deviation from some standard. Moses was to instruct the priests who in turn elaborately laid the guilt on the sinner and extracted a material penalty from the sinner. Which incidentally became the property of the priest since after all, God could have nothing to do with material things.
Next I asked myself... is there any survival value to something like a sense of guilt? Because if there were survival value then the sense of guilt would be innate and it would have evolved over the millenia. But guilt, unlike fear, did not seem to have survival value. So I had to conclude that guilt represented a survival value only to the community and not necessarily to the individual. For example. If I stole something from some other man, or woman for that matter, it would give me pleasure or satisfaction of some sort. However, it would cause a sense of loss in the other person. Soooo the sense of guilt and the state of guiltiness appears to be a man-made concept to protect man's property.
While I had my nose in the Bible, I looked at the Ten Commandments as a whole. And I thought I saw a pattern. It appears that the first five commandments describe the existence and omnipetence of God and the second five describe the respect for man's property. In biblical times property consisted of a man's women, his children, his animals, his tents wagons and other equipment.
Curiously enough, in today's lexicon this concept extends to women, children, animals, the environment and the like. In other words a respect for the personality of all living things.
Thursday, February 10, 2011
Home Alone... and I am not 5 years old either
Well Barbara has left me alone for about nine days. When people ask, I blythely say "she has gone to Heaven". But before they can express their sorrows, I tell them that heaven is Palm Springs and she is having the time of her life. She is visiting her daughter, Mary, and my old friends Phyllis and Dan Reynolds who have been living there for about 3 years are planning on showing them all the good spots. After a harrowing 11 hour trip due to delays in connection at LA, Barb has settled in to the delights of fruit trees scattered around for anyone to pick and real snow-capped mountains only a couple of miles away. And best of all temperatures in the 60's and 70's which are no challenge to a gal whose blood has been thickened in New England most of her life.
With all the conditioning of a lifetime as mother and wife, Barb left me with a refrigerator full of packaged food for the next nine days. She made sure that three jugs of green tea were cooled in our outside refrigerator, namely the garage and finally a can of coffee and filters should I get a hankering for a fix of caffeine. But this lead to a series of adventures for this old city boy.
Now there have been times in my life when I had to resort to frozen dinners for my sustenance. But pre-cooked and packaged in aluminum foil and whatever are a challenge I was not prepared for. So this is what happened step by step and up the learning curve we go.
Removing the aluminum foil and the Saran wrap was merely child's play but now I come to find that the food was firmly stuck to the paper plate that it was placed on.`
Brute force did no good because that just resulted in more or less paper shreds sticking to the pile of food itself. So then let me just put it in the microwave and heat it for a few minutes.... result.. a smaller snowball and the paper still stuck on but more peelable. Ugh.. remove more of the paper and flip the food and back into the microwave for another couple of minutes...now it is fairly pliable but still pretty cool. Ok so it is a real challenge. Back into the microwave for five minutes this time. Wallah! Now it is completely heated, in fact hot as hell. But that is what the very cold ice tea is for.. to keep my tongue from blistering.
Now I can sit down to dinner. No problem except this one long shred of paper I kept chewing on before I realized what it was and also the lesson that meat tends to get very well done even in the microwave.
This is what I learned on the second day. I left the uncovered plate on the counter for a half hour before I attempted to unbuckle the food from the paper plate. Aha this time most of it came off. And there was only a golf ball sized snowball in the middle of the food. So I put it in for three minutes and stirred it when I took it out... looked pretty good so I put it back in for another three minutes.
Success at last except that the broccoli didn't taste the same somehow as when Barb makes it for me straight up.
But the paper was kept to a trifling minimum.
Now today I plan on unwrapping the meal and placing it on a towel on the counter for about a half hour... this should do a better job of defrosting and allow the paper to peel off 100% and result in a consistency that will allow for stirring or mixing at an earlier stage. Then I can put it in the microwave for only three minutes and eat a warm meal with out making it into shoe leather. If that does not work then Burger King here I come...
With all the conditioning of a lifetime as mother and wife, Barb left me with a refrigerator full of packaged food for the next nine days. She made sure that three jugs of green tea were cooled in our outside refrigerator, namely the garage and finally a can of coffee and filters should I get a hankering for a fix of caffeine. But this lead to a series of adventures for this old city boy.
Now there have been times in my life when I had to resort to frozen dinners for my sustenance. But pre-cooked and packaged in aluminum foil and whatever are a challenge I was not prepared for. So this is what happened step by step and up the learning curve we go.
Removing the aluminum foil and the Saran wrap was merely child's play but now I come to find that the food was firmly stuck to the paper plate that it was placed on.`
Brute force did no good because that just resulted in more or less paper shreds sticking to the pile of food itself. So then let me just put it in the microwave and heat it for a few minutes.... result.. a smaller snowball and the paper still stuck on but more peelable. Ugh.. remove more of the paper and flip the food and back into the microwave for another couple of minutes...now it is fairly pliable but still pretty cool. Ok so it is a real challenge. Back into the microwave for five minutes this time. Wallah! Now it is completely heated, in fact hot as hell. But that is what the very cold ice tea is for.. to keep my tongue from blistering.
Now I can sit down to dinner. No problem except this one long shred of paper I kept chewing on before I realized what it was and also the lesson that meat tends to get very well done even in the microwave.
This is what I learned on the second day. I left the uncovered plate on the counter for a half hour before I attempted to unbuckle the food from the paper plate. Aha this time most of it came off. And there was only a golf ball sized snowball in the middle of the food. So I put it in for three minutes and stirred it when I took it out... looked pretty good so I put it back in for another three minutes.
Success at last except that the broccoli didn't taste the same somehow as when Barb makes it for me straight up.
But the paper was kept to a trifling minimum.
Now today I plan on unwrapping the meal and placing it on a towel on the counter for about a half hour... this should do a better job of defrosting and allow the paper to peel off 100% and result in a consistency that will allow for stirring or mixing at an earlier stage. Then I can put it in the microwave for only three minutes and eat a warm meal with out making it into shoe leather. If that does not work then Burger King here I come...
Friday, February 4, 2011
Out with the old... In with the new
Well folks along with the snow and ice and the responsibilities for year-end financial duties for the Sabian Publishing Society my usual weekly pattern of posts has become bi-weekly during the month of January at least. So as a result I received a "get with it" poke in the butt by my good friend Peg along with a couple of questions on Astology.
Since your "WalrusSez" has been pretty quiet, could I suggest:
Why don't you editorialize on the recent changes they have -- or are trying to -- foist upon us? I'd be interested in hearing your opinion on the new number of planets and the new number of astrological signs.
OK, I figure at least you can put into words I can understand just what these things mean. The planets really don't impact me all that much (and probably that astrology wouldn't either) but I'd be interested in knowing how you feel about it. If you put it out there, the subject(s) might get some comments and we'd see how others interpret them.
What Peg is referring to is two recent comments..(1) the declaration that Pluto is not a planet, but considered a dwarf planet and perhaps maybe not even of the solar system and (2) that the stars which made up the constellations identified as signs of the zodiac are not in the same locations as they were thousands of years ago due to the precession of the equinoxes. And these are scientifically correct observations as our technology has allowed us to make more precise and refined observations of the universe that we live in. But this matters not in the system of Astrology which divides the sphere of the sky into 12 parts and comments on the relationships of the planets of the solar system as they travel around the sun in their orbits.
It is not my intention to write a book on Astology in this blog. But Astrology when it is done in the proper fashion is just as deterministic and follows similar protocols as any scientific discipline as I have ever studied. The purpose of Astrology has always been to solve problems and understand situations more complex than just plain human conjecture can accomplish. So then the main use for Astology and its primary tool, the Horoscope, is to understand human character and personality. To depend on any one or group of stars for that purpose is not necessary to divide the celestial orb into twelve sections. So the prcession of the equinoxes has no bearing on the insight into character and personality that is revealed to the Astrologer by the Horoscope. And by the way, it will return to the way it was orignally in only a paltry 25,600 years roughly.
In the beginning, as the ancients used Astrology some 5 to 6 thousand years ago there were only seven planets in the horoscope. The Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn. These were the planets seen by the naked eye. Later on after the telescope was invented, the planets Neptune and Uranus were added and finally around 1930 Pluto was added to the lexicon of horoscopy. So for about 80 years, Pluto was considered a planet symbolizing the higher mind or a quality of personality which shows enlightenment or intellectual expansion.
But alas and alack, perhaps being technically correct is akin to being politically correct but Astrologers will still include Pluto in their horoscopes and use it to signify probity or some other higher values of character inherent in us human apes.
Thank you Peg for your question.
Since your "WalrusSez" has been pretty quiet, could I suggest:
Why don't you editorialize on the recent changes they have -- or are trying to -- foist upon us? I'd be interested in hearing your opinion on the new number of planets and the new number of astrological signs.
OK, I figure at least you can put into words I can understand just what these things mean. The planets really don't impact me all that much (and probably that astrology wouldn't either) but I'd be interested in knowing how you feel about it. If you put it out there, the subject(s) might get some comments and we'd see how others interpret them.
What Peg is referring to is two recent comments..(1) the declaration that Pluto is not a planet, but considered a dwarf planet and perhaps maybe not even of the solar system and (2) that the stars which made up the constellations identified as signs of the zodiac are not in the same locations as they were thousands of years ago due to the precession of the equinoxes. And these are scientifically correct observations as our technology has allowed us to make more precise and refined observations of the universe that we live in. But this matters not in the system of Astrology which divides the sphere of the sky into 12 parts and comments on the relationships of the planets of the solar system as they travel around the sun in their orbits.
It is not my intention to write a book on Astology in this blog. But Astrology when it is done in the proper fashion is just as deterministic and follows similar protocols as any scientific discipline as I have ever studied. The purpose of Astrology has always been to solve problems and understand situations more complex than just plain human conjecture can accomplish. So then the main use for Astology and its primary tool, the Horoscope, is to understand human character and personality. To depend on any one or group of stars for that purpose is not necessary to divide the celestial orb into twelve sections. So the prcession of the equinoxes has no bearing on the insight into character and personality that is revealed to the Astrologer by the Horoscope. And by the way, it will return to the way it was orignally in only a paltry 25,600 years roughly.
In the beginning, as the ancients used Astrology some 5 to 6 thousand years ago there were only seven planets in the horoscope. The Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn. These were the planets seen by the naked eye. Later on after the telescope was invented, the planets Neptune and Uranus were added and finally around 1930 Pluto was added to the lexicon of horoscopy. So for about 80 years, Pluto was considered a planet symbolizing the higher mind or a quality of personality which shows enlightenment or intellectual expansion.
But alas and alack, perhaps being technically correct is akin to being politically correct but Astrologers will still include Pluto in their horoscopes and use it to signify probity or some other higher values of character inherent in us human apes.
Thank you Peg for your question.
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
I Get Big by Making You Smaller
Well folks ... I have been away for awhile attending a family spat with my favorite group... The Sabian Assembly. But before I get started I want to pass along a comment that I got to help some of you who would like to make comments but have found it difficult to do on Google. I hope that this is helpful and that we can get some comments to discuss back and forth... that might be fun.
When I signed up for google account I seem to have neglected to link it to this site. I went to blogspot home and logged in. Now I can respond!!!
By nutmeg45 on Happy New Year... let's start the New Year Right on 1/12/11
The last week or ten days have been spent in lending my 40 some years experience in solving some problems within our group. And it seems that sometimes when one problem is solved another one is created. The situation brought out something that I had learned many years ago that I called Dick DeGeiso's Law of Social Relativity... or "I get big by making you smaller". This I learned from watching kids play in the schoolyard and the like. They call each other names that refer to some peculiarity of the person to make them feel "smaller" so that the name caller becomes "bigger" in his mind at least. This gives rise to "fatty", "bow-legged", "big nose" and the beat goes on and on. This gets more sophisticated as the combatants get older and more experienced. In fact it is a juvenile form of the tactics sometimes used in debates or arguments known as 'Sophistry'.
To see such tactics used by adults in a discussion is disheartening and is in no way a testimony to their maturity.
When I signed up for google account I seem to have neglected to link it to this site. I went to blogspot home and logged in. Now I can respond!!!
By nutmeg45 on Happy New Year... let's start the New Year Right on 1/12/11
The last week or ten days have been spent in lending my 40 some years experience in solving some problems within our group. And it seems that sometimes when one problem is solved another one is created. The situation brought out something that I had learned many years ago that I called Dick DeGeiso's Law of Social Relativity... or "I get big by making you smaller". This I learned from watching kids play in the schoolyard and the like. They call each other names that refer to some peculiarity of the person to make them feel "smaller" so that the name caller becomes "bigger" in his mind at least. This gives rise to "fatty", "bow-legged", "big nose" and the beat goes on and on. This gets more sophisticated as the combatants get older and more experienced. In fact it is a juvenile form of the tactics sometimes used in debates or arguments known as 'Sophistry'.
To see such tactics used by adults in a discussion is disheartening and is in no way a testimony to their maturity.
Thursday, January 13, 2011
Obligation will save the Nation
In the beginning God created man and from man's rib he created women. And once they ate of the tree of life they procreated and started something that resulted in what is now a population of over 6 billion and growing. The first thing that man was aware of was himself. Perhaps he was aware of the cradling and protection of the womb, but certainly he became aware of his mother since she was vital to his emergence into the world. Then as he stretched his senses in all directions he became aware of the existence of others. But from this he developed the sense of "me" and that which is "not me". So this then lead to the idea of owning property.
From millenia ago everything became "mine" and in the harsh environment of the stone age man had to protect his property, his mate, his offspring, his cave, his tools and the list goes on. A rich man had many wives, many children, large flocks of animals etc..
This presented a problem because, then as well as now, people generally tend to be of two persuasions.. those that build of their own sweat and blood and those that take by force or guile. So when the "raiders" came, the men of property were forced to defend their property. The raiders would come in and kill the men and take the women, the children, the animals and now they became wealthy by possession.
Tribes were the defense against this outside aggression and what began as "me" versus "not me" became "we" versus "they". So men banded together to defend themselves against the others in the form of clans, tribes and the like and eventually built cities with walls and decided amonst themselves who would come in and who would be excluded. And this was the beginning of law.
The law determined the property rights of man. The collection of men who got together to determine the laws formed the first governments. So that the existance of government was in a sense to protect man's property. Then as well as now, the right to belong to a group and to share in its protection was dependent on the obligation to obey its laws.
From millenia ago everything became "mine" and in the harsh environment of the stone age man had to protect his property, his mate, his offspring, his cave, his tools and the list goes on. A rich man had many wives, many children, large flocks of animals etc..
This presented a problem because, then as well as now, people generally tend to be of two persuasions.. those that build of their own sweat and blood and those that take by force or guile. So when the "raiders" came, the men of property were forced to defend their property. The raiders would come in and kill the men and take the women, the children, the animals and now they became wealthy by possession.
Tribes were the defense against this outside aggression and what began as "me" versus "not me" became "we" versus "they". So men banded together to defend themselves against the others in the form of clans, tribes and the like and eventually built cities with walls and decided amonst themselves who would come in and who would be excluded. And this was the beginning of law.
The law determined the property rights of man. The collection of men who got together to determine the laws formed the first governments. So that the existance of government was in a sense to protect man's property. Then as well as now, the right to belong to a group and to share in its protection was dependent on the obligation to obey its laws.
Sunday, January 2, 2011
Happy New Year... let's start the New Year Right
2010 left off with a comment from Margery and it took me all this while to get it copied over to my Post. It seems that blogger sometimes allows comments and under some other mysterieous circumstances does not. So I suggested to her that if her comments were not getting through to email me at
richard.charles.degeiso@gmail.com Then it took me a century to copy from my gmail account to the comment section on the blog... but the devil would not paste in the comments section... soooo finally I pasted it on my next Post and here we are. And Margery wrote...
Sometimes a choice leads to another choice. If I come to a fork in a road and choose left, but find it to be other than what I expected I can chose the next two or three lefts and return to my starting point, albeit later in time. Else, it may lead me to more interesting adventures, as fate would have it. If I add too much garlic to the pot, I can add more chicken and make leftovers. I don’t see choice as an end, but rather a beginning. But I guess, then that’s where attitude enters the equation. Does that mean my experience has taught me there is no wrong choice? I’ve always said, make a decision and stick to it.
Well Margery.. if we were in the city, we could probably say that since the streets are laid out at right angles to each other mostly and taking a continuous left turn for example would lead one right back to where they started.. that is like the movie "Groundhog Day. But like every country gal or boy knows the forks in the road are more like the letter Y and that would make it impossible to go back in time as you suggest in your comment. Unfortunately the arrow of time in our reality always points to the future.
But I have to applaud your thoughts and perhaps some day if we ever get a chance to visit I can savor your most delicious chicken stew. You are right of course, choice is a beginning and true freedom is our everlasting right to make a choice. Experience tells us whether or not the choice was a good one so that when we come to another fork that looks like it might be similar(not necessarily the same) then we whould have a better chance of it coming out in our favor.
Let's hear it folks. If you can't leave a comment then give me a holler at richard.charles.degeiso@gmail.com
richard.charles.degeiso@gmail.com Then it took me a century to copy from my gmail account to the comment section on the blog... but the devil would not paste in the comments section... soooo finally I pasted it on my next Post and here we are. And Margery wrote...
Sometimes a choice leads to another choice. If I come to a fork in a road and choose left, but find it to be other than what I expected I can chose the next two or three lefts and return to my starting point, albeit later in time. Else, it may lead me to more interesting adventures, as fate would have it. If I add too much garlic to the pot, I can add more chicken and make leftovers. I don’t see choice as an end, but rather a beginning. But I guess, then that’s where attitude enters the equation. Does that mean my experience has taught me there is no wrong choice? I’ve always said, make a decision and stick to it.
Well Margery.. if we were in the city, we could probably say that since the streets are laid out at right angles to each other mostly and taking a continuous left turn for example would lead one right back to where they started.. that is like the movie "Groundhog Day. But like every country gal or boy knows the forks in the road are more like the letter Y and that would make it impossible to go back in time as you suggest in your comment. Unfortunately the arrow of time in our reality always points to the future.
But I have to applaud your thoughts and perhaps some day if we ever get a chance to visit I can savor your most delicious chicken stew. You are right of course, choice is a beginning and true freedom is our everlasting right to make a choice. Experience tells us whether or not the choice was a good one so that when we come to another fork that looks like it might be similar(not necessarily the same) then we whould have a better chance of it coming out in our favor.
Let's hear it folks. If you can't leave a comment then give me a holler at richard.charles.degeiso@gmail.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)