I cannot speak for other Cubs fans, but personally I gave Milton Bradley the benefit of the doubt when he came to Chicago, and even when he struggled early in the season. I really wanted the man to succeed. It would have been a wonderful story for him to have finally grown up and really contributed to the Cubs. Seriously, who would not have liked that outcome? People can change, and for him to have found a home in Chicago would have been a point of pride for him and the Cubs. But that isn’t what happened, and for me its obvious that its almost entirely Bradley’s fault.

I continued on comparing Bradley to Dempster, who struggled a few years back for the Cubs but handled it in a very different way:

Compare and contrast this with Dempster three years ago. He wasn’t a good closer. I wasn’t happy with the man at all. But I never, ever felt like he wasn’t trying. I never felt about him the way I felt about Bradley mid-season last year, even before Bradley started shooting off his mouth about the fans. Dempster’s talent and character have obviously shined through. He endured a tough situation and came through for the Cubs, for the fans, and for himself. Milton Bradley should study Ryan Dempster. This is the type of player Bradley should try to be.

Jewel is a beautiful cave.  Jewel is an apt description.  There are many crystalline features that make it a must see if you are visiting The Black Hills.  I found this video online from National Public Radio about a spelunking adventure at Jewel:

GivingAid.RichardDawkins.net

Image if Einstein decided to retract general relativity in the late 1920s, with no reason or evidence justifying this action.  Imagine he simply decided that he no longer supported the idea.  Surely that would have caused a great stir in the scientific world and particularly in the world of theoretical physics.  However, the scientific community, in the end, would not have abandoned general relativity without proof it was wrong.  They would have stood by the theory, since in the 1920s there was already a lot of proof that it was very right.  We don’t need Einstein to agree that the theory is sound; we need evidence to agree that the idea is sound.

Similarly with evolution, Darwin doesn’t really matter other than the fact he first proposed it.  What matters is not what aspects of his original theory are right or wrong, though the vast majority of Darwin’s original theory has survived the test of time and more than one revolution in biology.  What Darwin said or did doesn’t change reality.  The theory, backed with evidence, changes our perceptions.  And that evidence is overwhelming in the cases of General Relativity and Evolution.  An attack on Darwin, or Einstein, is just an attack on a person, not on all the evidence supporting their theories.

A belief in evolution is not a faith.  Its based on the fact that evolution has been proven true by multiple, separate lines of evidence.  Evolution, for all intents and purposes, is a scientific fact.  It doesn’t matter what attacks might be made on the great man.  Those attacks, or anything Darwin said or did, does not change the physical reality that all organisms have evolved to their current states via natural selection.

Quantum Physics flies in the face of common sense.  Our brains evolved with macro cause and effect, with objects that are solid and act in a fashion that we expect.  Particles at the quantum scale do not act solid, do not act in a fashion that our brain would expect, yet this science and been experimentally proven to a level that is only rivaled by the evidence for evolution or relativity.

One of my favorite sections of the book addresses quackery and popular misconceptions around quantum physics.  Orzel does a good job comparing and contrasting the science with the misconceptions perpetrated by these quacks, and by the media.

I would highly recommend this book for anyone looking to learn more about Quantum Physics.

Kandel, winner of the 2000 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine, was born a Jew, in Vienna, in 1929.  At age 10 the Nazis “invaded” Austria, and within the year he found himself in America.  Its is within the context of this start to life that he tells of his search for the biological basis of Freud’s theories, which ultimately leads him to the research of memory, many accolades, and an important place in medical and scientific history.

The science in the book is fascinating.  Kandel himself is a pioneer in neural science, but he spends many pages in each chapter discussing the brilliant women and men with which he has worked, many of whom have also won The Nobel Prize.  Kandel is a very talented writer, and exceptionally good at conveying complex scientific concepts to the lay reader.  The science of the mind is surely the most difficult of all of the medical sciences, and Kandel goes into detail while leaving the book accessible to the non-scientist.

When Kandel speaks of his past, his relationship to Europe and Vienna, his friends, and his family, he is particularly candid and touching.  The emotional depth of the book was surprising for me.  The man is clearly passionate about many things, and those passions ring through true and clear in the book.

At the end of reading the book I found my understanding of brain biology much greater, but I also found that I had learned a new aspect of the history World War II.  I also found that this man, who is obviously a talented scientist, is also Pulitzer-caliber author.  His writing is of such that I would wonder if this book might have won The Pulitzer if not for its scientific depth.

I cannot recommend this book enough.  It is one I am sure I will find myself revisiting in years to come.