Commercials are Annoying

If I remember correctly, cable television was originally hyped as a source of entertainment without commercials. It was the new, fresh alternative to network television with its proliferation of one commercial after another. The real value to early cable subscribers was solely the likes of HBO, Cinemax and the Showtime movie channels which were presented, as advertised, commercial free. At this early stage the jury was still out on cable. It took years before broadcasting companies both new and old recognized its value and began producing specialty programming.

Today, with the exception of some of the subscriber based movie channels, we are inundated with a variety of program choices that are virtually packed with an equal amount of commercials as programming. From the Food Network and Lifetime to ESPN or CNN, commercials almost, but not quite consume the lion’s share of a program’s length.

Last week we watched a movie on the Lifetime Movie Channel. The movie ran eight minutes then ran commercials for the next four. This schedule was fairly consistent throughout most of the movie. However in many instances as movies near the end, commercials often outpace the content.

Today, most network shows on CBS, ABC, Fox and NBC run slightly different schedules although I guess the average is about six minutes of programming to three minutes of commercial. That’s 20 minutes of commercial every hour. Another way of looking at this is 33% of your television viewing is commercial oriented.

Some of the talk shows run even more commercials. Take Dr. Phil or Montel for instance. Their schedule is approximately four minutes of programming to a two or three minute commercial break. Not only is the deluge of commercials annoying, it takes away from one’s interest in the program dialog.

Then there’s the repetition. Some advertisers see fit to run the same commercial numerous times within a program, if not back to back. It’s enough to make you want to pull your hair out! Toyota, are you listening?

And to add insult to injury this is an election year. Seems politicians employ the most mundane ad companies to produce their lies for them. Sure wish one or two would hire the company that produces the Anheuser Busch ads. Certainly at least one of the candidates might benefit from using the Clydesdale's. Might give new meaning to a horses’ ass.

Human Cloning

Most news networks on Thursday reported the story about a private laboratory in California who has successfully cloned a human embryo. Accordingly DNA was extracted from the donated egg and replaced with DNA from a lab donor. Reportedly, the altered embryo was later destroyed.

This is obviously mind boggling science. Yet with all the research going on in this area one knew that such a breakthrough would soon occur. I would expect that we will hear a lot of radical comments from the religious community over the next few months. From their perspective science is definitely prodding into areas reserved solely for Mother Nature.

One of the reports I listened to explained some of the positives associated with this knowledge that I hadn't even considered. Theoretically a laboratory could grow a new organ that would be an exact replacement for one that had failed or become diseased. Since the new "part" would be a duplicate, the body would not reject it. Quite a plus for someone with say heart or kidney problems.

From a sinister point of view I can perceive a lot of negatives. Imagine if someone such as Adolph Hitler had this science available to him. Would his dream to create a superior Arian race be possible? What about some of the other off-the-wall lunatic dictators in the world today? Would not their ego alone impel them to insist that their linage continued through subsequent generations?

Then on the other hand there's the Hollywood crowd. Could any of us stand ten more Britney Spears or five more Paris Hilton's?

Food For Thought

I have strong Midwestern roots, having been born and raised in the Chicago area. Yet even as a city boy with a public school education I learned a little about farming. In the rich farmland of Northern Illinois, corn was the major crop. As one headed either west or south from the city, it was all that one could see. Knee high by the Fourth of July I was taught. For some, the sign of a good crop was measured that way.

Once the corn crop was harvested the farmers often planted a crop of soybeans. The crop usually matured by late fall and was simply turned under by the farmer. Why would a farmer plant a crop, then till it under one might ask? To simply add good, natural nutrients back into the soil. Such measures helped to insure another good crop the following season.

Times have certainly changed in the past twenty or more years. Soybeans are now grown for profit, not fertilizer. Natural fertilizers and soil enrichments have been replaced with a variety of chemical substitutes. Chemicals are used to insure product growth and increase the crops productivity or yield. Additional chemical products are used to insure against plant disease or insect infestation. With the exception of organically grown foods, chemicals are used to produce nearly every grown food we eat.

Animals grown for human consumption are not much different. Be it a cow, pig, sheep or chicken, chemicals are used in a variety of feed products to unnaturally prepare the animal for market purposes. A plumper chicken breast or a tenderer, tastier strip steak are quite often the by-products of such procedures. But hey, it looks good and tastes good! Isn't that what the market demands?

Never thought much about this until my wife and I began traveling out of the country. Spend a week on a Caribbean island or in Europe and you begin to notice a change. After a week or more of eating organic foods and consuming meat that has naturally grazed in fields or eaten organically grown feed, you'll notice a difference. Your body not only feels better, it shows in your complexion. There is a decided difference.

The FDA claims none of this should be concerning to us. After all, they're the Government, and they know best. Yet, time is the real measure of acceptance here and frankly, in my opinion, we haven't traveled far enough down that line to accurately gauge the results. Certainly changes in the younger generations are apparent to me. Can the same chemical that was used to grow the corn stalk two feet higher be ultimately responsible for abnormal body growth or obesity? What long term effect does the chemical preservative in the slice of bread you ate for lunch have on your ultimate health and longevity? Believe me, the FDA doesn't know.

Secret Societies

Over the holidays I enjoyed reading Sylvia Browne's newest book Secret Societies. For one who enjoyed the intrigue of The Da Vinci Code and Angels and Demons, this book added insight to many of the questions raised in the novels. Sylvia acknowledges author Dan Brown for the thoroughness of his research, therein clarifying that many of the theories presented in the books have indeed more truth than fiction.

On our recent visit to the Louvre in Paris, our tour guide paused us at the base of the inverted pyramid. He commented that "according to the Da Vinci Code, it was hinted that Mary Magdalene might in fact be buried here". Fiction I'm sure, but pause for concern. In Secret Societies Sylvia does point out that Mary Magdalene was buried in France.

Three of the Societies mentioned in the book are of special interest. The first is the Skull and Crossbones, a prominent clandestine group of sorts that calls Yale University its home. Prominent members include both George W. Bush and John Kerry. Can you imagine those two sharing the "secret" handshake? Two others of interest are the Freemasons and the Knights Templar, both which share histories back to biblical times. By chance I caught a program recently on the Discovery Channel which highlighted much of the historical knowledge of the latter two. It was quite enlightening but did not include some of the facts outlined in the book.

To accept some of the research that Sylvia Browne used for her book you have to first understand the psychic nature of Ms. Browne. This highly talented psychic often uses her spirit guide Francene to assist her. As such, you have to have a belief and understanding of spirit guides and the role they play in all of our lives.

My wife and I have both learned of the importance of our spirit guides. It is all part of a bigger picture that is time related and includes the supposition that we have all gone through many lives before reaching the one where our souls now reside. Dr. Brian Weiss has done considerable research on this subject and has written several interesting books on past regressions and future ones too.

For further insight you might go to one of the following websites. Sylvia's is www.sylvia.org and the Dr. Weiss website is www.brianweiss.com. If you want to experiment with your own past regressions you might try

http://caliente1.isis77.hop.clickbank.net/

Have a fun and interesting journey.

Cell Tower Proliferation

This past summer we took an extended tour through France. As our bus rambled through the countryside I was quite amazed at the solemn beauty of it all. From quaint towns that are hundreds of years old to stunningly beautiful vineyards, farms and mountains, the scenery is inspiring. What we didn't find was even more amazing. There were no billboards, no roadside trash or litter, or more importantly no cell towers to proliferate the landscape.

I asked our tour director about such things. She told me that France had laws which protected the beauty of their countryside. Structures such as cell towers have to be integrated into the landscape in such a way that they are either invisible or inconspicuous. Antennas are often placed on water towers, barns, high buildings or on treed hilltops to conceal their appearance.

I know some States are more restrictive than others but here in Florida, cell tower proliferation has become a cancer. Towers that are extraordinarily ugly in appearance seem to be popping up at an alarming rate. Within a five mile radius of our home I can count at least five of these 200 foot abortions that have been erected within the last year.

Who to blame? Why our local and State government, of course who are obviously oblivious to such matters. However, laws or regulations that legislate aesthetic standards are often hard to defend. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, or so they say. Yet somewhere, somehow we ought to be able to legislate against ugliness.

I plan to pose the issue to my State Senator. I'd be interested to hear is take on this issue. Time will tell.