Terrible movie, but this had me cracking up:

I would like to address something that’s been bothering me, if you don’t mind.

The topic tonight: CSI: Crime Scene Investigation.
I got into this show a couple years ago, mostly because of the science in it and the sometimes totally messed up stories. Sue and I really enjoyed it, and we set our TiVo to record every episode that was shown on any channel, and we quickly caught up with all the episodes. I liked it, but after a while I started to realize this show wasn’t as intelligent as I thought it was. The CSI’s (especially those of the female persuasion) often got very emotional when dealing with suspects, shitty quality photos from a black and white security camera can be ’shopped to the quality of 10 mega-pixel camera with a few clicks of a mouse, and DNA testing is cheap and can finished in the time of a worn-out musical montage. But I looked past that for the creative stories, and, of course, Gil Grissom.

But then I started watching CSI: Miami.

This is without a doubt the worst show that has appeared on television in quite some time. I have never seen anything quite like this. Horrendous acting, overblown sets and props, ridiculous criminals, and the most unpleasant excuse for a main character I have yet come across. Horatio Caine, with his cocked head, practically identical outfits, and infamous sunglasses, has an aura of foolishness that never ceases to amaze me. I can’t take this man seriously. For every remark a suspect has, he comes right back with a quip that essentially assumes they are the murderer and are merely hiding it, and that he will quickly find them out. Forgive my ignorance if I’m wrong, but I thought there was such a thing as “innocent until proven guilty.”
He’s always taking his sunglasses off or putting them back on. When they aren’t on, he holds them with both hands near his crotch, though not directly in front of, god forbid he ruins the view. With every damsel in distress, he comforts them in a way that would make me personally afraid for their safety if this weren’t a TV show. I often expect him to say something like, “Daddy’s going to keep you safe and warm,” and then walk up and lay his hand on their chest.
But I think the thing that gets me the most is his voice and manner of speaking. He’s in capable of being anything but serious. I’m positive I’ve yet to hear him tell a joke of any kind, save for the smart-ass remarks he makes when they find a body. For example:
   ”Frank, it turns out the wave is not the only thing about to hit Miami.” or
   ”Well, you know what they say, Frank: speed kills.” or
   ”Frank, where’s Patrick now?”; “I don’t know, he’s missing from the scene. Maybe he took off.”; “Or maybe he got taken for a ride.”
These all came from a nice video seen here: Link.
Keep in mind near the end of each of those quotes, Caine can be seen pausing, putting on his sunglasses, then finishing the quote.
You’ll notice that in each of those quotes, Horatio says the name of who he’s speaking to, more often than not, a detective named Frank. He does this constantly. Whenever he speaks to someone, especially on his team, he’s meticulous about saying first names in a rather condescending tone that seems to reassure himself of his eternal wisdom. I can’t believe anyone can watch this show and think “What a great show!”
By the way, for Jim Carrey’s take on the one and only Horatio Caine, check this video out: Link 2

As for CSI: New York, I don’t have much to say. I really like Gary Sinise, but the show hasn’t ever done anything for me.

That’s all for my rant, have a nice day.

So I have two more finals Tuesday afternoon and then I’m done for this semester. I really am glad. While I love my major and can’t get enough math, I fear my brain may be near it’s breaking point. If I have to spend one more hour sitting in front of a blank page just thinking about how I’m going to go about the problem at hand without actually writing a single thing, I think my cranium may have a small explosion that will send numbers, functions, derivatives, and integrals across the room.

I’ve been thinking a lot lately, now that I’m only a year away from my graduation, about what the hell I’m actually going to do with my degree. Though I’ve been trying to avoid even thinking about it since I became a math major, it seems being an actuary may not be so bad. It’s consistently rated as one of the top 10 best jobs in America (Link 1, Link 2), with a median salary of about $75K (more than an engineer, according to USNews) that often reaches six figures. If there’s one thing I know about my future job, it’s that I want it to be challenging, without being stressful. I don’t want to go into work everyday feeling like zombie.
So we’ll see. I’ll have to do some more looking into it and talk to an advisor.
I’m also going to take a class on cryptography next semester, see how I like that. ASU offers a “Cryptology Program”, though there is no official title like “B.S. in Mathematics with a concentration in Cryptology.”

That’s all for this update. I have to go eat the delicious dinner Sue just slaved away over.

Alright, so I’m starting a blog. I usually don’t have much to say, but sometimes things need to be said. So here’s where I’ll do it.

I bought a book tonight at Half Price Books: Darwin’s Black Box by Michael J. Behe. If you’re familiar with Behe, let me say right away I did not buy it because I think he has something scientifically significant to say. Far from it. Firstly, I’m interested in his arguments for Intelligent Design. I know they’re fundamentally flawed because I learned about his main arguments in a class I took this semester. I was hoping to learn in a bit more detail how he tries to pass this shit off as scientific. Secondly, Sue and I plan to make a video and/or mini-website using this bit of literature that should hopefully demonstrate some of it’s more practical uses rather than a serious scientific text. Anywho…
This whole Intelligent Design thing baffles me. At least Creationism attempts to make predictions, describe mechanisms, and show characteristics of a somewhat scientific idea (not that it is). Intelligent Design merely says, “This is complicated, it must be designed. Hence God an Intelligent Designer exists.” Most proponents of ID accept the idea of an old earth and common descent. Yet they refuse to believe evolution actually produces more complex life because it doesn’t seem statistically possible (as if evolution works by the random chance that a heap of molecules fell into place and formed an ear, nose, wing, etc.). When it is discovered that something once considered designed is shown to be a more complex form of a slightly simpler, earlier form, they stop talking about it and move onto other examples of design. Maybe someday they’ll run out of examples.
While a bona fide scientific theory would, Intelligent Design has no testable predictions. You can’t say,
“Look at this leaf. It is so complex: it performs photosynthesis to nourish the entire plant. I think I’m formulating a hypothesis… Yes! It think it was designed. Let’s test it: … I think I’ll use William Dembski’s brilliant Explanatory Filter. Is it highly probable this arouse from a pile of random molecules? No. Is it intermediately probable? No. Is it very improbable and appear to have been designed? Yes. Well according to the filter… Eureka! This leaf was designed! Behold the beauty of the Scientific Method.”
Sorry, but that’s not science. You try to pass that through peer review and I get a feeling it won’t make it far.

My teacher hinted that Intelligent Design may be dying out, and the new thing could be called Sudden Emergence. From what he showed us, it’s nearly word for word the same thing as ID, just carefully written to appear superficially nothing like ID. We’ll see how that pans out.