Mind Fog

I've been reading too much and writing too little. Even with my very limited posting schedule -- Mondays and Fridays -- I'm having trouble putting words together because my head is lost in what I've been reading.

Aside from the novels I've been inhaling like spring air, here's the scoop on my other reading . . . and PLEASE don't think I expect anyone to go to every, or even any, link -- the list is only to provide a glimpse of the things that have been on my mind, and if you see anything that catches your interest, the link is there to pursue it.

. . . A long, long, long piece (as in nearly 80 pages if you copy/paste it into a Word document to read at your leisure, which I did, but when you eliminate the pictures, it's only 67 pages) from The New York Times Magazine (Losing Earth: The Decade We Almost Stopped Climate Change) on global warming and how we failed to do anything about it thirty years ago when we had a chance to make it better. Note: Be aware that if you do not have a subscription, you will have five free views of the New York Times sites per month before you are blocked from further access. I've only made it through the first 25% at full power reading and the rest at a skim, and it's pretty depressing, so be aware of that also.)

. . . A very readable and understandable piece on blockchains, also from The New York Times (so it will count in your five free articles per month), here: Confused About Blockchains? Here's What You Need To Know

. . . A rather shocking piece on crows that perhaps you shouldn't read if you like crows and want to keep thinking well of them: Ne'crow'philia: Why crows sometimes fornicate with the dead which pretty much tells you what it's going to address

. . . A piece on Amelia Earhart's final SOS call from Mother Nature Network which is described as "haunting" and I don't think anyone would disagree

. . . Many, many politically tinted pieces, probably too many, and I'm going to not link to any except this one from Brookings Institution, an American research group which is considered to be non-partisan, evidenced by the fact that it is referenced equally by both conservative and liberal politicians (Source: Wikipedia). Don't let the title put you off when you get there. I found it rather comforting.

. . . On the lighter side, this piece from a few weeks ago that still makes me roll my eyes: These 'Extreme Cut Out' Jeans Cost $168, But At Least They Have Pockets (from Huffington Post) and this one as well: So, Now There Are Upside-Down Jeans No One Asked For (from MSN Lifestyle).

. . . Followed by yet another eye-roller, this time about how a good girl has gone bad: Marie Kondo wants you to buy more boxes (from TreeHugger)

. . . And finally, this from ThoughtCo: Calculating How Many People Share Your Birthday which, it turns out, does not have a straight-line mathematical answer


And since we can't have only words, words, and more words on a Donkey post, let me leave you with this:

I have never tested this statement myself, but I completely trust this cat. Wouldn't you? (source: icanhas.cheezburger.com)

 Have a good weekend, my people, and (sneaking this in here for the stalwarts who read the whole entire post, you are the very definition of dogged, aren't you?) the name of the book whose ending so horrified me that I didn't want to mention it last week is Handle With Care, by Jodi Picoult. I felt better about both the book and the author after getting a thoughtful comment from Diane Henders, suggesting that the author didn't set out to disappoint me (or any other reader); believe it or not, that hadn't occurred to me (time for another eye roll, right?). But as an excellent author herself, Diane was able to bring that point of view to the table and temper my reaction to Picoult's book. Thanks, Diane :) (You can find Diane's blog here and home page, including a link to her book information, here. Have a read; she'll lighten and brighten your day.)