Newspaper Archive of
Hays Free Press
Kyle, Texas
April 26, 2017     Hays Free Press
PAGE 3     (3 of 16 available)        PREVIOUS     NEXT      Full Size Image
PAGE 3     (3 of 16 available)        PREVIOUS     NEXT      Full Size Image
April 26, 2017

Newspaper Archive of Hays Free Press produced by SmallTownPapers, Inc.
Website © 2019. All content copyrighted. Copyright Information.     Terms Of Use.     Request Content Removal.

+ QUOTE OF THE WEEK "We said if they couldn't improve Main Street while preserving the trees, we would rather not do it." + -Colin Strother, Buda P&Z chair, on the preservation of Buda's heritage oak trees. See story, page 1A. Hays Free Press * April 26, 2017 Page 3A "ost of y'all saw the . movie "The Terminator" where the world was ruled by machines, right? At the time that movie came out, most of us thought it was just science fiction, but today, with all the current technology and stuff that will be appearing in the near future, you've got to wonder how far from the truth it is. Just look at what we have now. There are robots assembling cars and other products. Drones are used by the military to attack the enemy. Robots are used by the police to defuse or detonate bombs. And who hasn't received those annoying robo-calls from political groups or time-share resorts? Cool, Huh? But hold on! Each new gadget puts humans out of a job. Toll roads used to have booths manned by humans, but now, cameras and computers do most of the work. Crossing guards are rare these days thanks to electronic monitors on crosswalks that say "Wait" or "Walk". Personally, I'd like to see one that reads "Better move it, old man." Who remembers going into a drug store and getting a refreshing beverage from a soda jerk? Today, if you want a soda, you go up to some fancy machine with lots of buttons to push. I used one just recently. Now, I admit that I'm not real tech savvy, so it took a while for me to figure this contraption out. First, I pushed one button for Coke. Then one for cherry and a third button for vanilla. I was so proud of myself for being a nouveau nerd but quickly realize I made a slight mistake by forgetting to put a cup under the dispenser. Hey, there was no instruction on that screen that said "Put a cup in first, old man." I saw the other day on TV that we will soon have driverless taxis and big rigs cruising down the highway. I found this a little scary but then I realized driverless vehicles are probably safer than those humans who text and drive. And I bet robo- cars will use their blinkers and won't tailgate. These might be alright, unless you are a truck driver or a cabby. We have all been to stores with self- check out lanes, but now, Amazon has a grocery store that scans products taken off the shelf and links up to your smart phone to create an From the Crowls Nest by Ciint Younts invoice. Shoppers just grab what they need and skedaddle out the store without going through a check out lane. No need for human grocery clerks. Schools are turning to technology to teach kids. Computer programs and online classes have become abundant. Human teachers may get booted to the curb while the class is being taught by artificial intelligence. I wished I had a computer teaching me when I was in the 3rd grade. My knuckles still ache from being whacked so often by a ruler- wielding teacher. So, what jobs are left that won't be stolen by robots? Well, as y'all probably guessed already, I have come up with a few. No hot-blooded man will tote a wad of currency into a strip joint to watch an exotic dancing machine gyrate around a pole. And I can't see a robotic bouncer tossing out a drunk who went too far and grabbed the dancer's mother board. It's safe that urologists won't lose their jobs to a machine. A woman may place her bosoms in a mechanical device for testing, but there ain't a man alive who'd allow a steel claw to check his prostate or want to hear a robot say, "Turn your head and cough." What kind of robot could do the work of a cowpoke? No cyborg could rope a steer, mend a fence or pull a calf all in the same day. Besides, wet cow manure would surely short out some circuits on some electronic cowboy. And lastly, even with all the technology we have today, there is no electronic substitute for some redneck who writes a humor column for a newspaper. I reckon I have job security unless some goober up at MIT creates artificial ignorance. Clint Younts. He's not a robot, nor is a robot likely to replace him. However, his wife would probably love to have a robot run around the house cleaning the floors after he walks in from herding cattle - at the Crow's Nest outside of Buda. crowsnest78610 B, AN6 LAgESt4 C INA VIF-'I'NAM wu D.eoM voz.l~~.~ ~tToota~ .QOM INpON:F.SI A Is truth really I was dumping aper in the ocal recycling bin, I saw a discarded TIME magazine with "IS TRUTH DEAD?" on the cover. It caught me enough for me to stick my arm in the bin (not my first dumpster dive) for that April 3rd issue. I thought a history of truth with its relevance to modem times would be explored; that intolerance and exclusivity- two hated words of political correctness today- of non-truth would be exposed; that an ultimate source of truth, a divine intelligence (God to some) would be the subject. I thought it might explore why people say they love truth, but often lie. I pondered that if secular humanism can advocate situational ethics, why do people go to prison for doing something that is right according to their personal standards? If engineers and contractors skimp on cement to save money, as seen in China, and the bridge collapses and kills multitudes, why do Chinese courts sentence the builders to death? Their social philosophy, communism, is based on lies, and builders are merely following in the footsteps of their leaders. You've seen this: In studying evidence in their fields, philosophers, sociologists, theologists, environmentalists, Egyptologists, archeologists and psychologists decide to arrive at the truth together once and for all. They gather in a convention hall and pose questions, facts and missing data related to their subjects, and then vote on possible answers.After votes are tallied, what's true is settled.What arrogance and buffoonery! When new evidence appears, they reject it so they won't have to admit their majority vote was useless. Truth is that which conforms to reality, but they cannot decide what I coUldbe wrong by Ray Wolbrecht reality is. Reality is that which works. If it works it has to be true. I thought the TIME article might discuss the fact that reality is often ignored in favor of what people want to believe, eg. government programs like Head Start which don't work yet continue to be funded. I thought they might explore policies related to secular humanism, which goes back to D 's "Origin of the Species" and advocates that God is nonexistent and unnecessary. And it follows that mankind is inherently good and given enough time can solve all the world's problems. How's that working out for you? Truth is opposite to unrepented sin. 1John:10 says if we say we have no sin we make God out to be a liar and His word is not in us. Imagine then as you must, that humanism calls God a liar. How could one possibly accuse the Creator of this magnificent universe, Author of all things, including truth, to be a liar? Judgment is upon them, and in the end there will be abject sorrow as a reward. So... how deep does TIME go into truth? Sadly, true to their political agenda their essay is merely dedicated to calling Trump a liar, exploring his exaggerations, and belittling him. True, there's a lot to belittle, but in Washington he's in good company. Such a nano facet of TRUTH. I cannot but call it a mere iota of the subject, thousands of time less than they could've said ff they were serious about their cover catch phrase. I was hoping for a rib eye but they gave me Raman noodles. The issue was worth less than I paid for it. RfraayWolbrecht, my vorite dentist, etired without my permission, which I'd never have given had he asked. My trust is com- plete in his skill in all things between the nose and chin; his reasoning, however, sometimes leaves me baffled. Ray's dumpster rummage for Truth is as good as any. One never knows where Truth will be found, and the search may be as valuable as the find. Some say that's so, and such a search begins with unraveling cherished notions, picked up along the way but having little relationship to reality. Accurac as Ray pointed out, has more than a passing relation- ship to Truth, so let's talk about accuracy. Ray stated as fact (no evidence included) that philosophers, sociolo- gists, theologists, envi- ronmentalists, Egyptol- ogists, archeologists and psychologists gather in their respective groups, present evidence, ask questions, debate facts, and then vote on what the truth is. WHAT,.. I have at least a hun- dred psychological con- ferences under my belt, and with archeology and Egyptology as favorite hobbies, I go to meetings on those subjects as well. Interest in world religions takes me to yet more conferences. Never have I seen any of these groups vote on what is "true" or do anything remotely resembling that. I suspect that any attendee propos- ing such a thing would be either ignored or laughed out of the building. Possibly he is con- fused by hearing about the Jesus Seminar, a group once dedicated to separating fact from fiction about Jesus. After examining the Bible, oth- er documents, archeolog- ical data, and whatever else they could find, they voted on the probable accuracy of each biblical account of Jesus. I know nothing about their quality in scholarship, but I knowthat it is a mis- take (to put it politely) to say their technique is or , and logic Tutta's Take by Wynette Barton ever was followed by the groups he mentioned. Next Ray tackles either secular humanists or thai theory of evolution; it's .*# hard to tell which. If it's evolution, it should be noted that theory and wild guess are not the same animal. Theory presents evidence and invites further inves- tigation to prove or disprove its premise; wild guesses don't. Galileo barely escaped death for presenting evidence that Earth circled the sun. Inquisitors insisted his "foolish and absurd" theory conflicted with biblical teaching. Had his students not persisted, we might still believe Earth is the center of the universe. So long, satel- lites and cell phones. Some theories fall . apart after further study. like the one that pro- posed eating bat wings to deter demons from causing disease. Sounds crazy now, but who'd have guessed that organ- isms too small to see could kill people? Its end came after the micro- scope was invented. Verifiable facts; Charles Darwin, Origin of the Species author, was a deeply religious man who studied for the ministry before taking up science. He never suggested that God was nonexistent, but rather that genes follow natural laws that help animal life survive. Nature has laws, like the one that makes a ham- mer fall back down if you throw it up. Every time. I've not heard anyone say that accepting the law of gravity interferes with religious beliefs. Ray said if something works, it has to be true. Lies, slander, prejudice and murder "work" frighteningly well, but that discussion is for anther time. Meanwhile, I wish Ray happy dump- ster diving.., in every way. I'll try it too. ,2 ,j ) Ji' Ba onpubcatonsnc l CenerS News tips: Opinions: 512-268-7862 Publisher Reporters Proofreaders Production Manager Circulation/Classifieds Cyndy SIovak-Barton Samantha Smith, Lesly De LeonJane Kirkham David White David White News and Sports Editor Logan McCullough, Quixem Ramirez. Marketing Director Distribution Moses Leos III Columnists ]-racy Mack Production Assistant Gabe Ornelas Bartee Haile, Chris Winslow, Marketing Specialist Christine Thorpe Tanya Ornelas Pauline Tom, Clint Younts James Darby + + !ilii: iF ..... itli