GP is right. If the words public static keep you from learning how to program you were never going to learn anyway. If I introduce someone to soccer and they quit because they couldn't figure out how to put their shoes on, chances are they werent going to learn how to play no matter what.
I think the converse(?) to this though is that the words public static are inconsequential.
Sure, if you are incapable of learning what a couple adjectives mean you won't go far, but that holds for much more than software.
Rather it's not important that the ball is big and blue so much as that you can kick it across the field - learning what the ball means can come later, but it's just unimportant noise (to start).
Java is pretty bad at this, though, insisting on specifying unimportant details up front rather than allowing for qualification. This is OK for a large monolithic application with complex requirements and a litany of edge cases, but inappropriate for many smaller use cases.
Did you know that the first thing John Wooden did with incoming freshman collegiate basketball players at the most prestigious program in the country was teach them how to properly put on their socks?
