Archive for the ‘Star Trek’ Category

my nerdy family

There are those [weird] people who see being called a “nerd” as an insult. Then, there are those of us who [rightly so] see it as a complement. Never forget, without nerds, we’d all still be sittin’ in a cave somewhere suckin’ on rocks and gruntin’ at each other.

There are not words to describe the nerd pride I feel when I over hear my 8 year old discussing the Kuiper belt with his buddies, or when he comes up with some obscure/abstract way to solve a math problem that I had never though of. He’s truly a nerd-in-training.

But when my wife does something nerdy, it’s a whole different level of cool (and super hot). See, growing up, she was the cheerleader/beauty queen/popular girl … and, well, I’ve always been a nerd.  It’s no small miracle that she saw fit to marry me; I’m just super lucky really.  She’s always [secretly] had some nerd tendencies though; for example, she will sit down and read a 1,000 page book in a day … for fun … it’s crazy. But, sometimes she does or says something that’s just plain nerdy on anybody’s nerd scale.

Earlier this week, we were going over the boy’s spelling list for school. This week’s list focused on contractions (he insists on calling them “contraptions” instead of contractions). We were talking about the formality of saying things like “we have” instead of “we’ve”, when I mentioned that Data (of Star Trek fame) did not use contractions on a regular basis. Then, my awesome wife says this:

Yes, that’s how they knew it wasn’t Data in that one episode.

I was just super impressed that she had come up with some obscure Star Trek trivia off the top of her head; it was AMAZING.  The only thing that could have possibly made that statement any better is if she would have said:

Yes, in Episode 13 “Datalore”, Captian Picard knew that Lore was impersonating Data because he used a contraction.

It was awesome; I love my family.

*The super nerdy among us would point out that Data’s use of contractions is somewhat of a hot button topic (as evidenced here), but that’s really irrelevant to the point.