Let's play an audio track from Phil's stomach 17 hours ago:

"grhrhrhrhr...bluburnapubuhubbah...whourlawhoosh...grrrraggggggg..."

That' what egg nog does to Phil's stomach!

Controversy Conversation: This one ranges back a few years to a dispute I had with my older sister Hope.  After waking up at a late hour I ventured to have a meal.  Somehow, and in someway we ended up arguing what meal I was having: breakfast or lunch?  She claimed it was lunch, for it was 12:30 P.M. and that's right about the median hour for holding lunch.  My position was that since it was my first meal of the day it had to be breakfast, which was supported by the dictionary definition of breakfast: "The first meal of the day, usually eaten in the morning."

The definition presents another strong case for it being breakfast since it says usually eaten in the morning; indicating the possibility of a non-morning breakfast, which is what category I say my situation falls under. 

But, if I ate at 12:30 P.M. and then again at 7:00 P.M., where does lunch fall? It is excluded.  Besides, lunch very nearly did not make the cut as being an actual meal, minding that much of the world in history and present does not have a sufficient supply of food to apportion three meals a day, and lunch is the one that is omitted. 

Although, one could argue for lunch on grounds of indicative food choice.  Supposing I woke up at 12:00 P.M. and fixed myself a sandwhich or soup rather than cereal or a bagel, is it then lunch? I should say it is still breakfast, for if I woke up at 6:00 A.M. and made a steak I would still consider that breakfast on account of it being the day's initial repast. 

However, another problem arises.  There exists an absurd crowd of crazed and deprived souls who opt out of morning's marvelous menu to starve until lunch.  If you didn't catch that, these people skip breakfast.  This lends serious problems to my argument.  If these emaciated kids wait until noon to eat lunch, does that mean that the first meal of the day isn't always breakfast?  For in this case, their first meal would be lunch. 

Alas, I think only a clarification be made.  Of course, breakfast is the first meal of the day, but I think it also has a time barrier from the moment you wake up to when you first eat.  This is where the debate turns into a muddled heap of puzzle pieces.  If someone wakes up and eats immediately, then no matter what time it is that person is eating breakfast, given they just arose from sleep for the night, or that was their night's sleep.  However, if they delay in eating, then I believe their motives are what count towards labeling the meal.  If they had been meaning to eat breakfast, or if they intend to eat breakfast, then it is their breakfast.  However, if a person awakes and simply skips breakfast, then the next meal they eat is most likely lunch, however I do believe it is within the realm of possibilities to skip both breakfast and lunch. 

What makes all this open to individual concern is this: The expended timeframe laying after the night's slumber until which the person is not able to eat the meal defined as "breakfast" anymore is not recorded in any objective setting.  Also, a person's intent on specific meals can only be weighed by one's own conscience. 

Thus, I conclude that not all meal scenarios may be defined in written law but that one must be true to oneself when eating meals.  Think of the hobbits: They have two breakfasts.  Just goes to show that meal defining is subjective to the dining party.  

Changing tunes, where is all the wretched snow?!? I am home alone all day when I could be building snowlific monuments! Sigh...

I wish you all very merry days, and not just on Christmas, but that on each day we may have joy in life and Jesus.  Farewell my confreres! Peace and Grace. 

Merry Christmas.

-From all the employees at StrokeofThought Inc.  

(and a Happy New Year.) 

My sleep schedule is doing terrific.  I have slept the past two nights from 3 AM - 2 PM.  Now, isn't that the way it's done?

Shopping. I suppose I should try doing that sometime before Sunday.

I think the system of "calling it" is the greatest method of deciding things ever.  Any other method, such as voting, fighting, hereditary, or any other means are simply inferior.  There are no dispute when you call it, except when some other idiot is jealous and angry that you called it first.    

Waffle friday is tomorrow! Possibly even a better holiday than Christmas, unless of course you have waffles on Christmas, in which case Christmas is a little bit better. 

 Recent interest: Classical music.  It probably has to do something with the fact that I learned who all the famous composers were for In The Know and became interested in what sort of music could make these men so famous.

Stop! Think! Have you gone to filmsandfaces.com today yet? It's Neat's and nate. I mean Nate's and neat.  Whatever, just go.

That's a wrap.

OMG, is that you?!?  IT IS! Hello! So good to see you.  Come in, come in out of the cold and have some hot chocolate.

I made the play! Here I am, an ardent disbeliever in evolution and I am cast as Bertram Cates -- an evolutionist schoolteacher who is on trial for teaching out of Darwin's Origin of Species.  The irony is priceless. 

Mock Trial is also picking up steam -- it is going to be intense.  Two pschiatric expert witnesses are going to be exciting testimonies.

You know, if there are people in Hilliard who want us to have a school day when snow has presented a possible snow day, they should shovel for it.  Play fair and square, none of this snowplowing business.  If they really want it that badly that they don't cancel school on a day where a student driver ends up totaling their car then the shovel's in the garage, buddy.  Salt can be legal, but only table salt.  Out of their cupboards.  

Bye sillies.  [Yoda voice] Things to do, mmm hmm hmm [/Yoda voice]