Blogs of Our Friends
Blogs are a great way to keep up with friends and family. We have been collecting links to blogs and other websites owned by people we'd like to keep in touch with. You can click these links to visit the sites themselves …
- Life in General
- Four Girls and a Guy
- Woolgathering
- The Boys and Me
- Darren
- Vernon
- Steff and Nol's Place
- Three kids and counting (Pulsiphers)
- Kelly and Will Larsen
- Mark and Karen Ray
- Where is the Laugh Track?
- Geekily Ever After
- Benj, Melinda, and Jason
- Live, Laugh and Love (Arthur and Sarah)
- Inspiration Station
- Julie and Andy
- The Colorado Wright Family
- Allred family Blog
- Don and Sarah
- Keeping Up With Kate
- Kelsey Hartley- my OK friend 8)
- Wise and Otherwise
- Krimme World
- Bybee Family
- Bernadine
- Horrocks Family
- Lloydlings
… or, read them right here (the ones that provide feeds):
Gasparilla 5 K
Posted on March 2, 2010 at 2:01 AM by Julie and Andy
Marco Island
Posted on March 2, 2010 at 1:49 AM by Julie and Andy
Our room!
pictures from Marco Island
Annual Father Daughter Dance
Posted on March 1, 2010 at 10:07 PM by Four Girls and a Guy
2 months already!
Posted on March 1, 2010 at 5:57 PM by Benj, Melinda, and Jason
.jpg)
The Not-Blog
Posted on March 1, 2010 at 3:49 PM by Geekily Ever After
I recently re-realized that I'm an opinionated person. My wife can attest to that. We both are. You can imagine the debates we have at home about the proper orientation of dishes in the dishwasher, or in the car about what the correct fan level is appropriate for a given temperature setting. Really, it's not a differential equation, but it might as well be. At least if it were, there would be a logically sound, mathematically proven answer that we could both agree upon.
One of the things I feel strongly about is that both partners in a marriage should agree on some set of foundational principles. It'd be hard to keep a mariage in good standing when you vhemantly disagree and constantly fight about who is right and who is wrong. According to Chaos Theory, it'd be virtually impossible to find someone who agrees with absolutely everything that you do and you never disagree about anything. In fact, Chaos Theory suggests that slight deviations in initial conditions tend to result in divergant solutions which deviate greatly from the expected results.
But we try very hard when it comes down to politics to come to a consensus so that we both agree, at least at large, one way or the other. It just seems absurd to have one of us vote one way, and the other vote the opposite, thus nullifying our voting power. Some people even go as far as just not voting since they'd negate eachother anyway. But when you agree, you get 2 votes whichever way you decide.
As the number of variables in any system increase, the probibility of desired results decrease. Take a binary system (or fair coin), where every situation can be represented as a true or false value, or a set of true or false values. Thus, as a new variable is added, the total number of possible outcomes increases by a factor of 2. The system can be represented as 2^n, where n is the number of things which are to be decided.
2^10 = 1,024
2^15 = 32,768
2^20 = 1,048,576
As shown above, exponential equations explode very quickly into large values, even at small values of n.
With the above data, assume you and your spouse would like to agree on 20 random topics. Where the value of whether you or your spouse view the topic favorably or unfavorably are completely random. There are 1,048,576 ways your spouse might view those 20 topics. Since your views are pre-determined, you want to know the probibility that your spouse belives the same way you do. In a completely random scenario, this would only happen 1 out of 1,048,576 times, or 0.00000095367431640625. Say that's far too low of a chance, so let's reduce the number of things you have to agree on down to 10. Now, your spouse only has 1,024 possible ways to answer thsose 10 topics, but they still have to answer them exactly the way you would. That's 1 / 1024 = 0.0009765625. That's about 0.1% Yikes, didn't think it would be that hard to agree with other people, did you?
Luckily, our decisions aren't completely random, but it's understandable why dating is so difficult. Trying to find someone that has the same core values and principles as you is not an easy thing to do. And, really, who wants to fill out a questionaire on your date, and be statistically matched with people who are "compatible"? So, we're lucky that we find spouses with somewhat-matching interests and beliefs. The family and friends relationship implies that there is some pre-existing mutual interest or belief system. But when you branch out beyond your immediate family and friends the element of randomness starts to increase.
This idea is closely related to Quantum Mechanics. When dealing with particles on the sub-atomic level, you quickly realize that Newtonian physics is really just an aproximation; a consistant and reliable average of the chaos of particles that make up a substance. Newtonian physics is very simplistic. The variables are few, and their values known. In a sense, we can predict future events because we know the variables. We know that a ball will roll down the slope, because we know the values of enough of the variables. However, when looking at the interactions molecules on the Quantum scale, there are thousands, if not millions or billions of variables that affect the result of a given equation. This gives rise to the Uncertanty Principle, and Binary Entropy.
When a fair coin is tossed, it's entropy is exactly 1. You need exactly one bit of data to represent the outcome. However, when using a biased coin, you need less than one bit of data to represent the outcome, because the data is compressible. Truely random data will not be very compressable.
People are very much the same as coins. Your spouse is a heavily biased coin, your family and friends are somewhat biased coins, and random people are probably far from the ideal fair coin as well, just that their bias may tend to be further from your beliefs. And, when viewed on a Quantum level, there are so many people out in the world, that it is highly unlikely that any two people would completely agree on any set of topics.
So it really doesn't make much sense for me to post my opinionated political viewpoints on a blog where random people might read them. I'm much more likely to find positive feedback when I simply tell my spouse, family and friends about my thoughts than other people who might happen upon my blog.
project life: february
Posted on March 1, 2010 at 4:50 AM by Life in General
february 4 - treated the kids to a bowl of vanilla ice cream before bed. But . . . the homework is not quite done. Conner, in true Conner fashion (standing, rather than sitting on his seat), finishes up his reading paper. february 16 - Lunch. Apple slices. Sugar snap pea pods. Turkey & spinach on Oroweat whole wheat sandwich thins. Trying to eat a little healthier. february 18 - The crocus are up! The crocus are up! Oh how...
Posted on February 28, 2010 at 11:29 PM by Woolgathering
lots of crafty bloggers have been making pillows from old sweaters but pillows of this sort weren't going to match anything in my place so I thought I would try something I hadn't done in about 8 years - turn a grown up shirt into a baby shirt:
yes, that is a stain on my carpet. no, there were no spots without stains in which to take the photo. deal. 
the hat lasted exactly long enough to get a photo. then he threw it on the floor and we've been fighting about it ever since. he sure likes the sweater though. cashmere tastes - I mean feels - good!
so much for being pc
Posted on February 27, 2010 at 11:03 PM by Keeping Up With Kate
Hey there!
once there was a snowman
Posted on February 26, 2010 at 4:28 PM by Kelly and Will Larsen
the kids: winter '10
Posted on February 26, 2010 at 5:33 AM by Life in General
Conner has a toast-making routine in the mornings. He starts the toaster and runs to the piano to play something he knows from memory (Called to Serve, I Know My Father Lives, or a song from his piano books called "The Carnival", I believe). He plays the songs at hyper speed and every once in a while jumps up to check the status of his toast (the toaster has a timer). And if he is playing the piano when the...
chicken and wild rice soup
Posted on February 26, 2010 at 4:26 AM by Life in General
It's been quite a while since I posted a recipe here. But this soup is most definitely blog-worthy. {photo taken just after the addition of spices -- curry, mustard powder, pepper, parsley} I made this for the second time yesterday and Scott & I can't get enough of it. The kids on the other hand . . . they were happier with a can of chicken noodle soup. {sigh} They don't know what they're missing. The recipe came from My...
All or Nothing
Posted on February 25, 2010 at 9:32 PM by Where is the Laugh Track?
Claire has figured out how to ride her bicycle without training wheels. And the process was just so... Claire. Let me explain.
--------
Claire -- talking
Claire said her first word at around 12 months old. It was "bird" but she said something that sounded a lot more like "buh." But it was specific and said while pointing at birds, so it definitely was a word. I was pretty sure. Definitely... maybe. I thought from there she would most likely slowly add to her repertoire. Instead? Silence for three months.
Well, okay, not "silence" but no more words. Not even "bird" anymore. What happened? I must have dreamed the word "bird." Or maybe something was wrong? Then all of the sudden at about 15 months, she just started talking... and pretty much hasn't stopped since. There wasn't the "ramping up" period I expected. It was like one day she didn't talk at all and a month later she was not just saying a few words, but proficient.
For a long time she stuck with mostly one word at a time. Then all of the sudden at about 2 years old, she said her first real sentence. She started with two words, but within a couple weeks she was stringing together 4 or more words. Sometimes these days, I wish she'd go back to one or two word answers because seriously, Claire, can we just stop talking for a few minutes so I can think???
--------
Claire -- walking
Claire went through what we called a wounded soldier crawling phase for a LONG time, finally figuring out a "normal crawl" at about 11 months. But no sign of walking. Then at just over a year old she figured out how to stand up. Like in the middle of the floor with nothing to hold onto. She would just get up and stand there until she lost her balance or got bored. But still no walking. Didn't even cruise (i.e. walk around by holding onto furniture). We spent lots of time standing her up against the couch and then trying to coax her to let go of the couch and take a step towards us, but nothin'. (Oh foolish first time parents who actually WANT their child to be mobile! Ah, the naivete!)
Until she was 15 months old. Then one day, she stood up by herself in the middle of the floor and took a few steps. A couple days later, she was walking everywhere, never using any furniture. And I really mean EVERYWHERE. She would just stand up and walk across the room and on the rare occasion that she fell, she'd just get back up from wherever she fell. Because apparently using furniture is for sissies, yo.
--------
Claire -- reading
I didn't "do" anything to get Claire to read. I mean, don't get me wrong. I'm an "involved parent" if I do say so myself. I read to her. I answered questions. I occasionally and very casually mentioned phonetics when she seemed interested. But things seemed pretty "normal" to me. I mean, kids who are super great readers usually start when they're like three, right? Or like in utero or something I'm pretty sure. Claire was four and still didn't do more than recognize environmental print or the occasional word like "BOO!" on Halloween cards. And I wasn't pushing it. But she was interested and asking about it a lot and one time I told her that when she read a whole book by herself someday I'd buy her ice cream. Wait, no, not just ice cream. An ice cream CONE!!!
Well!!! Not long after, she laboriously trudged through "Go Dog Go!" with lots of help from me. I coughed up the cone. I thought that would be kind of the end of it for awhile. Not so! She took off. She started out needing to sound out almost every word with help from me to decipher it. In about a month everything in a beginning reader book was a sight word. I think it's that she has this amazing ability to memorize. It's like she only needs to be told once what a word is and it immediately becomes a sight word. Man, I wish my brain worked like that! Seriously, do you have any idea how many hours of my life in college were lost because I had to do the subtraction from 9 times 9 AGAIN to figure out what 8 times 9 was?
And it just kept going like that. Trying to keep that child supplied with non-overly easy but not too scary books is no small task. Especially when she has a morbid curiosity but anything that might possibly be construed as spooky is way too stressful and leaves her fretful. (Note to self: buy stock in "Magic Tree House" series) (Other note to self: make sure M is the one who has to break it to her in a few weeks that she's read every.last.one. and will have to branch out *gasp*)
--------
Which brings us to:
Claire -- bike riding
We've been trying to teach Claire to ride a bike without training wheels for awhile now.
[Side note: DO NOT get me started on the training wheels debate. It appears that M and I see eye to eye on all matters of great import save it be the evils of training wheels. I've conceded that they're fine for people like him who can just run out and try new things and have some modicum of success within the first fortnight. Claire takes after me and my "impressive" coordination. Training wheels teach people like Claire and me to ride firmly leaning to one side lest we find a way to trip on our own dorkiness.]
We made attempts at the usual running along behind the bike holding the seat. But all we had to show for it was a sore back. As soon as we would let go she'd slide her little bum over to one side of the seat and lean her body the opposite way. Not sure what the goal was there, but it usually ended in a spill. And a spill usually ended in a microscopic little superficial abrasion. And with Claire each square centimeter of abrasion warrants a full 4 hours of whining, crying, and declaring that she "can't stand it." (But those four hours can be deferred. They can be applied on an "as needed" basis to undesirable moments like non-cookie dinners and bedtime.) So we had temporarily given up on the bicycle thing several times.
Then a couple weeks ago, Claire's friend from school came over to play. She already knows how to ride a bicycle. You know, a real bicycle. The kind that, as the name suggests, actually only has TWO wheels. Watching that friend ride around on a bike, Claire was green with envy. You could see it in her eyes. This business of being one-upped was unacceptable. So she got on her bike and told me that she was going to ride a two wheeler too. She took a few minutes to figure out how to get her pedals into the appropriate orientation. And then she rode off down the sidewalk.
Since then, she hasn't fallen down once.
Catch up
Posted on February 25, 2010 at 3:50 AM by Inspiration Station
In January, I wanted to finish writing the posts I never got to in 2009 to include in a blog book of all my years of blogging. I can’t believe I’ve been blogging for almost 4 years now. Crazy, but it has been neat to go back and read our homeschool and child-rearing adventures. [...]
DMCC
Posted on February 22, 2010 at 8:43 AM by Where is the Laugh Track?
We need a new couch. There are many reasons, but M and I have found yet another very important motivation.
Our current couch has only two cushions. They're big cushions, so the problem isn't so much that the couch is not big enough (although once Kate starts taking up significant couch real estate that will become an issue as well). The problem is that we really need three cushions in order to keep Claire and Scott from fighting when they're both on the couch.
"Mom! Claire's not giving me anywhere to sit!"
"MOM! Scott's pushing me!"
"MO-OM! Claire's kicking at my feet!"
One might think that two is enough because it provides a clear halfway point. All I SHOULD have to do is call a cease fire and then designate Claire's side and Scott's side, right? But in practice the only way to really achieve lasting peace is a demilitarized zone. Or should I say a "demilitarized couch cushion"?
Posted on February 21, 2010 at 6:56 PM by Woolgathering
cause he's just too cute.
and he just knows it!
