23:14

Yes, it is actually later than that, but my computer clock is constantly losing time. I do not know why it will not stay set properly--even when it is plugged in all of the time and not just turned off it never stays correct for long. I cannot wait for Windows to actually run its time search--it would be much too far from normalcy by that point.

What can I say?

It is hot and muggy. Did I mention that it is hot? Did I mention that the humidity makes it even worse? Well then it still needs to be mentioned again! It has been hot and muggy.

I was busy so I didn't get outside too much today, so I didn't sweat as much as I could have, thankfully. Tomorrow I'll be outside more, unfortunately.

Tonight I learned how to play golf. No, not with clubs, well yes, there are clubs, but not what you're thinking. Clubs and spades, not clubs hitting balls. I played a couple of different versions with my mom and she also taught me the game garbage. We didn't play much of that, but it was also fun. Hopefully I'll get to play more later--and if we teach my nephews then I'll get to play anytime. :-)

~Matt

Short Work

Just before dinner I recieved a call from work. Apparently one of my co-workers never showed up for his shift. I'm off today, but they wanted to know if I would come in for two hours tonight. I thought about it for a moment, and realizing that I wasn't doing anything much (and I'll be working 9-5 the rest of the week) I said yes. As a bonus, because they don't want to pay overtime, they'll let me go two hours early on Thursday.

Today we all (including my parents who are visiting) went down to Lexington to watch my nephew Ryan play his last soccer game of the season. It was quite hot (up to 90 F) and muggy, but an interesting time nonetheless. On the way back we stopped at bigg's and purchased more corn. Last night I bought ten ears for $1.00, and the prices were still good today so my sister, mom, and I all went in. We cooked up some today and will probably have the rest tomorrow night. They aren't the biggest ears, but for the price I can't complain--plus they did taste good!

Right now I'm waiting for my clothes to come out of the dryer. I was planning to wash them tonight, tossing them in the dryer before I headed to bed if necessary--but that wouldn't work going in. All of my work clothes were dirty. So I threw in a load as soon as I said I'd come in, and I think I'll have just enough time for them to dry before I need to put them on.

~Matt

Smithsonian

I recently subscribed to Smithsonian magazine when I recieved an offer that I couldn't refuse. I also recieve National Geographic Magazine, and have for several years. I know that both are steeped in Evolutionary thinking and I accept that. I am a Creationist. I believe that everything in the Bible is true, period. If God said it happened, it happened. The Earth and everything in it was created in six literal days (no day ages or billions of years). I either ignore or privately laugh at the Evolution based articles. But one I couldn't help but be disturbed by.

The article is in the May 2006 issue of Smithsonian and is entitled "Dinosaur Shocker!" It relates how Paleontologist Mary Schweitzer discovered soft tissue inside the fossilized leg bone of a supposedly 65 million year old T. Rex. I'll quote two paragraphs from the article before continuing:

Meanwhile, Schweitzer's research has been hijacked by "young earth" creationists, who insist that dinosaur soft tissue couldn't possibly survive millions of years. They claim her discoveries support their belief, based on their interpretation of Genesis, that the earth is only a few thousand years old. Of coruse, it's not unusual for a paleontologist to differ with creationists. But when creationists misrepresent Schweitzer's data, she takes it personally: she describes herself as "a complete and total Christian." On a shelf in her office is a plaque bearing an Old Testament verse: "For I know the plans I have for you," declares the Lord, "plans to propser you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future."

Okay, well first of all it is a literal reading of Genesis, NOT an interpretation. Reading in day ages or billions of years is an interpretation. I am a man. To believe that that statement is me claiming to be a male human is NOT an interpretation, it is literal reading. Secondly it is implied that creationists aren't paleontologists, and by extension not scientists. I take great exception to this. Besides the several Doctors (earned degrees at accredited Christian and secular universities!) that I knew in college there are many Creationist scientists with the best credentials. But this spin is not surprising--they have to discredit Creationism however they can because they refuse to grant it a fair hearing.

Thirdly I take issue with Schweitzer's claim. I'll state upfront that one cannot surely know the state of another's immortal soul--but this gives me doubts. First of all she denies the validity of Scripture--yet she seems to affirm it if she thinks the verse worth putting up. How can a God who lied from the very beginning (Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.) be trusted to know the future and bring it about? Or what if he lied in Genesis so that the simple people of Old Testament times wouldn't be confused by the truth of Evolution. Then wouldn't it follow that we cannot know what else he might have lied about? Answers in Genesis (whatever you think of Creation) has it right when they say that once you reject Genesis 1:1 you have undermined the entirety of Scripture. You have started down an extremely slippery slope. Without a literal reading of Genesis you have no reason for Christ to die and be resurrected. If men weren't created and evolved then Adam and Eve weren't real and they didn't sin. Thus there is no need for a redeemer.

According to Scripture Adam and Eve were definately human, not the first primordial organisms to evolve who somehow without brain, souls, or anything else remotely sentient chose to disobey God and sin--thereby condemning all of their evolutionary descendents to an eternity in Hell unless they waited billions (or is it only millions for life?) of years for Jesus to be born and die.

Outwardly you can be a "Christian" if you reject the Bible, but you cannot be a "complete and total Christian" if you reject the very tenets of faith. It would be as if a Muslim rejected everything Mohommed taught, and then said, "but I still follow Islam." It would be a lie, he would be following his own religion that might have some similarity to Islam--but it wouldn't be Islam.

Young-Earth Creationists also see Schweitzer's work as revolutionary, but in an entirely different way. They first seized upon Schweitzer's work after she wrote an article for the popular science magazine Earth in 1997 about possible red bloood cells in her dinosaur specimens. Creation magazine claimed that Schweitzer's research was "powerful testimony against the whole idea of dinosaurs living millions of years ago. It speaks volumes for the Bible's account of a recent creation."

This drives Schweitzer crazy. Geologists have established that the Hell creek Formation, wehere B. rex [the skeleton containing the bone in question] was found, is 68 million years old, and so are the bones buried in it. She's horrified that some Christians accuse her of hiding the true meaning of her data. "They treat you really bad," she says. "They twist your words and they manipulate your data." For her, science and religon represent two different ways of looking at the world; invoking the hand of God to explain natural phenomena breaks the rules of science. After all, she says, what God asks is faith, not evidence. "If you have all this evidence and proof positive that God exists, you don't need faith. I think he kind of designed it so that we'd never be able to prove is existence. And I think that's really cool."

Where to start here? Good question. There is another subtle dig by referring to Earth as a popular science magazine, but not even mentioning that Creation has scientifically based articles. But that isn't a big deal--they are so entrenched in the idea that to be a scientists YOU MUST accept Evolution that they can't get past that. I don't expect anything better. But again I have a problem with what Schweitzer says. Let us go back to an oft mentioned quote from C.S. Lewis which I'll paraphrase: "Jesus wasn't just a good moral teacher. He was either a lunatic or truly the Son of God, there is no middle ground."

All verses are from the NASB.

John 14:6-9
Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me. If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; from now on you know Him, and have seen Him."
Philip said to Him, "Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us."
Jesus said to him, "Have I been so long with you, and {yet} you have not come to know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; how {can} you say, 'Show us the Father'?

Clearly Jesus is saying that if you have seen Him you have seen God the Father. A sane man could never truthfully make this claim.

Matthew 9:2-3
And they brought to Him a paralytic lying on a bed. Seeing their faith, Jesus said to the paralytic, "Take courage, son; your sins are forgiven."
And some of the scribes said to themselves, "This {fellow} blasphemes."

Luke 22:70
And they all said, "Are You the Son of God, then?" And He said to them, "Yes, I am."

Luke 5:21
The scribes and the Pharisees began to reason, saying, "Who is this {man} who speaks blasphemies? Who can forgive sins, but God alone?"

Forgiveness of sins belongs only to God. Sins are an affront to Him, and only He can forgive their commision. Were Jesus a man he would definately have been blaspheming at that moment.

John 8:52-59
The Jews said to Him, "Now we know that You have a demon. Abraham died, and the prophets {also;} and You say, 'If anyone keeps My word, he will never taste of death.' Surely You are not greater than our father Abraham, who died? The prophets died too; whom do You make Yourself out {to be?}"
Jesus answered, "If I glorify Myself, My glory is nothing; it is My Father who glorifies Me, of whom you say, 'He is our God'; and you have not come to know Him, but I know Him; and if I say that I do not know Him, I will be a liar like you, but I do know Him and keep His word. Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw {it} and was glad."
So the Jews said to Him, "You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?"
Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am."
Therefore they picked up stones to throw at Him, but Jesus hid Himself and went out of the temple.
(emphasis mine)

Confused? Let us go back to Exodus where God was talking to Moses out of the burning bush:

Exodus 3:13-14
Then Moses said to God, "Behold, I am going to the sons of Israel, and I will say to them, 'The God of your fathers has sent me to you.' Now they may say to me, 'What is His name?' What shall I say to them?"
God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM"; and He said, "Thus you shall say to the sons of Israel, 'I AM has sent me to you.'"

Leviticus 24:16
'Moreover, the one who blasphemes the name of the LORD shall surely be put to death; all the congregation shall certainly stone him. The alien as well as the native, when he blasphemes the Name, shall be put to death.

I AM describes God, it is his name. He isn't a "was" or a "will be." Always God is I AM. At creation, I AM. At the flood, I AM. At the birth of Christ, I AM. At the end of time, I AM. Everything physical is God's creation. He is above it, beyond it, He is NOT a part of it. He is I AM. For Jesus to say "I am" was a very, very clear statement that he was claiming divinity. He could not be a "good moral teacher."

Now perhaps someone can have saving faith in Christ and yet reject Genesis. I doubt that these two could go together, but I don't reject the idea. I know that Genesis is true, so the person in question is still wrong, but they may be saved. Thus I do not come out and say that Schweitzer cannot possibly be a Christian, I simply doubt that she can truly be a spokeswoman for Christians. She serves much better as a method of placing up strawmen arguments such as "science versus religion." You can find many accredited scientists who disagree with Schweitzer and are not "hijacking" her reasearch. You could say they're hijacking God's creation to prove their ludicrious theory if you wanted to have fun. :-)

None of this was surprising to me or unexpected. It was merely an interesting note within a fascinating (once you get past the millions of years old crap) article.

~Matt

Long Nights

Today I work until 22:00 and tomorrow until 23:oo. But the good news is that after that next week should be great. Two days off and three days only working until 17:00. Tonight, however, is the time my parents arrive. They've been down at my brother's place in Tennessee for a couple weeks and now they're coming up to Kentucky to visit for a couple weeks. It will be great to see them. In college I came home every few months, but I've not seen them in over a year at this time.

~Matt

Indonesia Earthquake

You'll have to click on the screenshot to see greater detail and to make sense of what I'm saying (if you're in Firefox just open it in a new tab). I woke up this morning (after falling asleep early last night) and looked at the news section of my Google toolbar. I immediately noticed that there had apparently been a large earthquake in Indonesia. It wasn't until I looked a bit closer that I saw the whole story.

As is normal with disasters such as this (look at the 2004 Tsunami or Hurrican Katrina--though thankfully numbers went down with the latter) initial reports are almost always incomplete, especially in countries closer to Third World status.

Sidenote: These terms are holdovers from the Cold War. First World refers to the anti-communist Western allies such as the United States, the United Kingdom, West Germany, etc... Second World refers to the Soviet Union and its allies and satellites. The Third World are all of the other nations of the world, usually impoverished and battlegrounds in the Cold War.

The initial reports from 11 hours ago say 15 dead with hundreds wounded. By nine hours ago another news source was reporting 50 dead. Not a huge jump and not as big of a disaster as is now apparent. Especially with the recent Tsunami death toll this must not seem like a great deal in Indonesia. But, the numbers were nowhere near complete.

As of five hours ago estimates had jumped to 1,300 dead. Finally the death toll now stands at 2,700. I'm sure that it will probably rise from there as the bodies are counted (and this time there shouldn't be too many missing as there were none washed out to sea).

It is at times like this that we can bemoan what sin has brought to this world. Yes, people die every day and many more than this. However, they are not concentrated in one place, are thus ignored by the media, and so we seldom think about it. We don't think about the thousands of babies murdered in China (or even the United States), or the hundreds dying of starvation in Africa, or dying in genocidal campaigns in the Sudan.

When God created the world, "it was good." There was no sin, no disease, no suffering. It is the legacy of Adam and Eve that we now live in this cursed world of sin and suffering. But God is so glorious, for one day he will burn away all sin and create a new heaven and a new earth where there will be no sin, no suffering, no crying. 'Tis truly a great day to look forward to, and every day like this should remind me that something better lies ahead.

~Matt

Lost (spoilers) Quarters

Well yesterday at work I couldn't stop thinking about the finale of Lost. Just as it did last season I was engrossed the entire way through, though several times I looked down at my watch because we had seen so much I figured that it must be the end--but it never was. Yes there are many jarring parts about the show, especially how many main characters have died or disappeared. However, I believe that this truly is one of the strengths of the show. Besides the biggest of the main characters the show isn't completely dependent on the cast (and now with the big three of Kate, Jack, and Sawyer captured who knows what is next?). Characters aren't killed off or written out because they want to leave but because the producers believe that is the direction the story needs to go.

Authors can and sometimes do do this--perhaps not as often as would be refreshing (for they maintain popular characters)--kill of actors to satisfy the plot over love for characters; but most television shows are built around the main characters. We don't have much suspense because the main characters always live--unless they don't, and we know becuase the actor/actress usually blabs beforehand, or some media outlet reports the news. Before you can say "Jack-be-nimble" the news is all over and you can't avoid it even if you try your darndest. On Lost though, four main characters have been killed, two are missing (dead?), and two have left the island.

Besides all of the convoluted connections between each of the characters (and I only keep them straight by referring to Wikipedia pages after the shows air) this show reminds me of life. The characters are real, and the writers feel free to poke fun at themselves or address seemingly obvious dilemas that fans have questioned. Oh, and as much as I love Star Trek I'm quite glad there aren't any redshirts around! ;-)

Well that was all of the good news, now for the quite bad. Some *insert rude unprintable descriptive language here* person at the corporate offices have declared in their infinite wisdom that the quarter devices need to be removed from all carts at bigg's. We have no idea why this idea is being implemented. Yes, I will miss my quarter money dearly (though I won't miss seeing the old guy who comes in to loot the carts each day), but there is more to this than that.

Once before this store removed the quarter locks because customers were complaining about frozen locks in the dead of winter. Pretty soon they were complaining even louder that the locks were gone--so they came back and have been on the carts since. The customers (except for a couple grumpy out-of-staters who are too impatient) like the system. It does serve to keep the lot remarkably clear of carts (even when we can't get out right away to pull carts in) and makes our job easier as people return their carts to the cart corrals. Furthermore removing this system will make it much more difficult to bring carts in. No longer will we be able to pull in rows by hand--without them being hooked together this will be sadly impossible. We will have to use the mechanical cart caddy or work in pairs.

I am a supervisor at the museum, and I am a grunt at bigg's. I know how both ends of the spectrum work. I've seen stupid bosses and stupid employees--and dealt with both. However, I would really like to kick that *more unprintable descriptive language here* out of his corporate office and bring him down to my store. I'd then shove him out into the lot for a few days, then take off all of the quarter locks and see how he reacts--I think he might change his tone quite quickly.

Needless to stay I'm not going to be too happy at bigg's in the future. I've even less reason to stick around than I did in the past. I need to get even more serious about searching for a better job than I have been. Additionally I'm going to hold on to my May quarters for now until I figure out what I'm going to do. I might save them for going camping later this summer, or I might just spend them after all.

~Matt

PS I fell asleep when I was almost done with this. It should have been posted within a few mintues of the Lewis and Clark post, but ended up waiting until I woke back up a couple minutes ago and finished the typing.

Lewis and Clark

If you can catch this on IMAX then you need to! I just saw this tonight at the museum and it was spectacular. It features a reenactment of the famous expedition
along with superb narration by Jeff Bridges (brother of Beau Bridges). Most of the film is covered by the narration, with little spoken dialogue from the characters--it does not suffer for this however.

The narration is historical, but remains true to the 1800s. It doesn't make modern comparisons (except to say "at the site of present ________, South Dakota/Montana/etc...") and remains engaging. The music is inspiring and always an excellent accompaniment to the action on the screen. And on the screen, wow...

Yes, I've traveled through much of the American west--and up into the Canadian Rockies. However, I have not managed to see all of the spectacular sights you will glimpse in this movie. Think of the breathtaking panoramic shots of characters in the first Narnia and first Lord of the Rings movies--now multiply those scenes by ten and you'll come close to what is in this film.

Yes, it is an IMAX film, so it is only about forty-five minutes long, but I thoroughly enjoyed all of those minutes. If you cannot see this in IMAX, then try to find it at the library or elsewhere. If you're at all interested in history and enjoy great scenery then you cannot help but enjoy this. At this moment I believe that this is truly the best IMAX production that I've seen.

~Matt

Longe Time Gone

I won't be home much of the day today. I work 09:00-17:00 at bigg's, then I leave immediately from there to the Museum where I work until 23:00. It should be a long day as a result, but I'm off tomorrow until the late afternoon when I go into the museum again. On a positive note it is almost that time of the month where I cash in my quarters! :-)

~Matt

A Good Day (no spoilers)

Overall today wasn't bad at all. Sure I was at work for eight hours, but I pretty much got done what needed to get done and I got some good exercise in. I wish there was a way to compare what my arm and/or other muscle strength is now compared to three months ago before I started this job. I know that I've definately lost weight. Though college I weighed about 180-190 lbs. Now I'm about 160, and I know it didn't happen before this job. Pants that fit me perhaps a bit snugly a while ago, but still well enough are now quite loose. At one time I was wearing 36, now I think 32s are in order--because most of my pants that are now loose are 34. I'm not obesessing over the weight or anything, but 'tis nice to know that I'm healthier now. That is the one good aspect of this job--exercise that I normally wouldn't go out and seek on my own.

Well I came home to find that my book had arrived. Which book? I'm glad you asked. Schlock Mercenary: Under New Management. I must apologize though, the Amazon page doesn't have much really. I would link to the order page on the main Schlock site, but alas orders aren't being accepted yet. I preordered my book and as a result it was signed! :-) But you can't make regular orders yet--I'm not sure when, but it might not be until all of the preorders have been shipped, including the sketch editions. I headed down to the library after work and read the book. Sure I'd read them before, but it was still great! There was some new content, plus it was printed on glossy pages in beautiful crystal clear colour. Ahhh... 'Tis a sight to behold. I'll definately be ordering the next book when it comes out.

My only complaint is that the book starts in 2003, while the strip started in 2000. The artist (Howard Taylor) believes that before that date his art was truly horrible. I'll definately admit that it isn't nearly as good as it is now--he has greatly improved over the years. However, the storylines were still awesome, regardless of artistic quality. You can't beat the opening strip for impact! Click on that one link if not any others, please? Well at the point at which the book starts (if I recall correctly) Howard basically reset the strip in some ways. He didn't restart the storyline, but he included many recaps and other devices to make the previous sections superficially unnecessary. *shrugs* I'm just a story nut. I want to someday have all of Schlock printed and bound for my reading pleasure. Hopefully eventually Howard will agree. :)

Then tonight after I came back from the library I watched the two hour season finale of Lost. Yet again I was amazed. I was left with many moments of "ohhh!" and "wow!" I did recognize a couple of the actors from prior appearances, but one actress I think I must have seen in another show because she doesn't show up online as having guest starred on Lost before. But great acting from all concerned.

There were also many, many questions. I am continually amazed at how the producers steer this show onward (as of the finale it has been about 65 days since the plane crash in the pilot episode) and it changes, yet it remains intriguing. I'll definately admit that they could have kept to the somewhat simple survivors of a plane crash motif of season one and it could have become stale. Or they could have gone too crazy and totally changed the show. It has definately changed, never stagnated, and yet remained fascinating and utterly addicting! I can't wait for season three, but I must. I definately won't preorder the season this time as I'll just have to wait for it to arrive. I'll just save my money and go buy it once it comes out. Perhaps with a coupon at Borders...*shrugs* We'll see.

~Matt

PS Well great news on the Schlock front. I might have missed something, but this book won't be the first forever! Here is the post if you're interested.

Q: Will you ever put the first 1000 strips in print?
A: Absolutely. Pending the success of Schlock Mercenary: The Blackness Between (the book we plan to ship in November 2006), I’ll start work on Schlock Mercenary: Step Away From The Tub of Happiness sometime in January of 2007. That volume and its companion (currently untitled) will be much larger than the current books. Hopefully by November of 2007 we’ll have all 1000 early strips packed into two books. I don’t know what the price will be yet, and I’m not going to pre-announce anything else about this project until I’ve got a solid handle on SM:TBB.

Sunset

Yeah, I was a bit late getting up this morning. I didn't sleep in too late, but more than I like to. I had to rush a bit more than is normal, and I wasn't able to read my comics or webcomics as I normally would.

The day didn't go that badly at work though, rather well in fact. Sometimes it seemed to speed past actually. The best part was at the end of the day. It was quite nice to walk out to my car in the light. I haven't been working extra late shifts lately--but I just appreciated going home before the sun set tonight.

~Matt

Follow the White Rabbit

I'm late, I'm late, I'm late!

~Matt

Guten morgen

Yes, this is morning. No the cock hasn't crowed yet, but 'tis after midnight. Technically that is all that counts--naysaers like Chris aside (who insists it isn't morning until you wake up). I find myself staying up late because I want several hours to relax after coming home from work--like a normal evening. But to do that I have to stay up late. This works okay because I don't go in early later today so I can sleep in a bit--but not too much or I won't have time for anything before work. If anyone is reading this soon after I post it then, good morning! Buenos dias!

~Matt

The Spanish American War

Today I had an idea for a short story, but I'm forcing myself not to think about it. I have a science-fiction short story in the works--technically the third in my sci-fi universe, but if I can get writing it and finish it, hopefully it will be the first finished that I'm satisfied with. The first was produced in high school and essentially created my universe. The second was written in college and based off a series of short segments (one to two sentences) that I randomly wrote and selected. I enjoy it, but I need to extensively polish it. Anyway, I'm trying to force myself to work on Tassia's Story to the exclusion of other projects, so I'm going to limit myself to blogging about this new idea instead of working on it right now.

I've always been fascinated by American history, but especially the various wars in our past. Like it or not wars are a natural part of the (fallen) human condition. Man always fights wars--there is no utopia where men are always peaceful (unless they're brain dead). My favourite genres are science-fiction and fantasy. I define science-fiction as taking place in a future extrapolated from the real world and usually involving superior technology (sometimes technological regression is involved, but usually starting from a tech base more advanced than today). Fantasy takes place in a completely fictional world, most often includes magic, and may contain races coequal with humanity (i.e. not aliens from another world). There are some universes that don't quite work. Terry Brooks technically wrote science-fiction with Shannara since it is in our future--but aside from that one fact it is pure fantasy.

In the course of writing fantasy I like to keep a low tech base--what was available in ancient and/or medieval times. However, I will borrow from around the world and occasionally from upstream in the timeline, if I can justify the development at an earlier time in this new timeline. The cooperative fantasy universe I've developed with Miah has Elves, which I control. One segment of the Elves resemble Europeans in some ways, and they have kingdoms next to a place of religious significanace, like the crusader kingdoms in medieval Palestine.

However, today I had another thought, primarily because the old books I've been reading lately (like America Across the Seas) were written in the aftermath of the Spanish American War. What if I had two medieval/fantasy kingdoms (others are around--I don't especially like worlds that are too simplistic--look at medieval Europe and the dozens upon dozens of principalities). One is a young kingdom (no republics or democracies hereabouts) with heavy reliance on trade--the other is a declining empire that depended on conquest to maintain its opulence. (Yes, America and Spain, different.) For whatever reason (a problem with a ship similar to the Maine incident in Havana?) the two nations go to war and the younger kingdom is victorious. As a result the kingdom takes control of various colonial possessions. This is all fairly straightforward--basically what actually happened in real history.

But here comes the twist. How would a medieval nation treat natives such as Native Americans or Caribbean Natives? Then after they had colonized the lands of these natives how would another kingdom act when it came in? We know that the Vikings were driven out of North America by the Indian tribes--and the Vikings weren't poor fighters. Obviously I'm proposing that the kingdoms in question have more resources than the Vikings did, and better access to their home countries. However, there would be much less of a technological advantage than even that which Cortes had over the Aztecs.

I'm not sure how to approach this topic, or what would happen in such a story. But I'm going to throw the idea out there in case anybody wants to drop me a reply. If not I'll still be happy though--just because this is here I might be inspired to revisit this idea in the future.

~Matt