If you have not already heard, it snowed here quite a lot a few days ago. The surprising thing about this snow was that it came well into March. It was as though Winter was trying to hold onto its season with a firm, icy grip. As all of the students on Wabash college crossed their gloved fingers in hopes of cancelled classes, a few friends and I decidedly to patrol the campus in search of a snowball fight. Unfortunately, after visiting a
majority of the living units on campus, we had no adversaries to pummel with snow balls. We, instead, settled on playing in the snow that had accumulated in the mall. A few guys wanted to build snowmen, but the snow just wasn’t sticky enough. What began with my desire to build an igloo, turned into me being almost entirely buried in the mall. As the night crept in, we decided that it would be a great idea to end with something warm to drink. We headed to the brew and got some nice, warm drink. Vanilla chai, for me. It was a fun, cold night.
Last Friday was the National Act, and it was one that I was actually excited for. Ralphie May was the runner-up for the first season of last comic standing, and I have been watching him for a long time. Ralphie May is known (by those who watch comedy, at least) to be a very dirty comic. There is no question about it.
While it seemed as though there were a few uncomfortable people (maybe they didn’t know who Ralphie May was), it seemed to have been received well. My friends split my laughs into two categories: stage one and stage two. Stage one laughing can be defined as a chuckle. A “haha, that was pretty funny”. Stage two laughing, on the other hand, is a cacophonous sputtering of monosyllabic words permeated by deep-drawn breaths to keep me from fainting. During most of Ralphie May’s act, I was shifted directly into stage two laughter. There was no revving time, no warming up of my vocal cords. It was just a solid hour and a half of my brain getting less oxygen than it should have been. I loved the act. Also, knowing that he went over his allotted time (by about twice as much, for free) I have a lot more respect for him.
One of our very own, Dr. Flink ’72, gave a presentation entitled “Creationism vs. Evolution: A Worldview Conflict”. I thought the presentation was interesting, and it gave me a few things that I hadn’t previously heard of and needed to research myself. One of my largest problems with the presentation is the way that it is presented. Rather than comparing an contrasting the two sides of the creation coin, Dr. Flink blatantly pushes his own agenda: Creationism. He even goes as far as saying that evolution is physically impossible and that there is no real evidence for it. Dr. Flink and I come from much different “worldviews” (although we used to share worldviews until left Catholic school and took a real science course), but I just can’t get over how completely biased the argument was. I gave a presentation the evening following Dr. Flink’s entitled “Why Do We Believe?: Topics in Homeopathy and Religion” in which I talk about many of the empirical ways that we form beliefs. A major theme in my presentation is the roll of human biases, which Dr. Flink’s presentation was riddled with.