Into the Void

The Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. Speaks for Himself - New York Times

“… he mimicked President John F. Kennedy’s Boston accent and also mocked Senator Edward M. Kennedy’s speech. “Nobody says to a Kennedy, ‘You speak bad English,’ ” he said. “Only to a black child was that said.”

“Errrrr eh, errrrr eh…” But we do make fun of Ted Kennedy’s Boston accent! Pretty much everybody does. In fact, I think I’ll call it Bobonics.

I’m starting to really like Rev. Wright.

Evangelical Scientists Refute Gravity With New ‘Intelligent Falling’ Theory | The Onion - America’s Finest News Source

This would be funny if it weren’t so plausible.

“Traditional scientists admit that they cannot explain how gravitation is supposed to work,” Carson said. “What the gravity-agenda scientists need to realize is that ‘gravity waves’ and ‘gravitons’ are just secular words for ‘God can do whatever He wants.’”
–Dr. Ellen Carson, a leading Intelligent Falling expert known for her work with the Kansan Youth Ministry.

I occasionally interfere in the perpetual misconception that science is
somehow more than a quasi-objective reality check. The other day a
questioner postulated that the continued existence of homosexuality
effectively disproves “survival of the fittest” I give the fellow credit
for understanding that homosexuality is more than a lifestyle choice.
Nonetheless, I left a steaming pile for the questioner to ponder. I’ll go
back next week and vote for myself.

Survival of the Fittest applies at the population level, not at an individual level. It isn’t a “rule” in the way you’d think of a rule, it is about how environmental factors affect the diversity in a population. For instance, there has been an upsurge in asthma deaths since the US has relaxed air pollution standards.

Homosexuality is a continuum of desires whose expression is modulated largely by social forces. (I’m purposely leaving out the nature-vs.-nurture aspect. The jury is still out on genetics and in-utero exposure to hormones.) At one low point in our history, there was wholesale witch burning using homosexuals as faggots to light the fire.

For all you know, you are completely surrounded by homosexuals who are maintaining heterosexual relationships and reproducing just to “fit in.” You’re familiar with the concept of a “beard,” right?

I think this is a perfect adaptation, one that Evolution would be proud of if Evolution had intelligence. What intelligence is killing asthmatic children, again?

Modern women often prefer sensitive guys. Who knows? Maybe homosexuality confers a great breeding advantage on men who carry the trait.

;-)

Pretty much any psych med by itself will affect sex drive. I see folks taking a half a dozen of them, and then another med or two to counteract the side effects. The pdocs tell us that they DON’T because they don’t want us to quit taking them.

Perhaps we should refer to our meds as a “pharmaceutical chastity belt.”

Anything that tweaks your dopamine down is going to get rid of the emotional spark required to have something resembling a sex life. And anything that tweaks UP serotonin receptors does so at the expense of dopamine receptors. See this article, Notes on Anhedonia and SAD.

For men, there’s also the problem of peripheral blood flow - a strictly mechanical problem. Can’t get the old hydraulics to run, eh? Viagra and Cialis work by improving blood flow. Heck, coffee dilates the blood vessels too, and if you brew it at home it’s way cheaper than an ED pill. Diabetes is common cause of ED, so antipsychotics that affect blood sugar (most of the atypicals) might contribute to it.

Maybe the whole idea is to give us drugs that prevent us from breeding lots of little bipolars.

Charlton Heston died yesterday. They’re still trying to pry the gun out of his cold, dead hands.

Does the word “uncompromising” mean “having strong values” or does it mean “selfish, stubborn, and uncooperative?” Mostly I hear the word uncompromising in advertisements for large gas-guzzling SUVs. Stand your ground, you deserve as much gasoline as you can get!

Ok, let me parse that word that is so proudly used in advertisements, and worse, by our leaders.

Main Entry: un·com·pro·mis·ing
Pronunciation: \-?m?-zi?\
Function: adjective
Date: 1800
: not making or accepting a compromise : making no concessions : inflexible, unyielding
- Merriam-Webster Dictionary: uncompromising

Ah, inflexible. Are we talking about a lack of neuroplasticity again? I submit, then, that if a person is uncompromising then they have a mental deficiency that renders them incapable of making the compromises that smooth interpersonal and even international relationships. That explains a thing or two.

Main Entry: in·flex·i·ble
Pronunciation: \(?)in-?flek-s?-b?l\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Latin inflexibilis, from in- + flexibilis flexible
Date: 14th century
1 : rigidly firm in will or purpose : unyielding
2 : not readily bent : lacking or deficient in suppleness
3 : incapable of change : unalterable
— in·flex·i·bil·i·ty \-?flek-s?-?bi-l?-t?\ noun
— in·flex·i·ble·ness \-?flek-s?-b?l-n?s\ noun
— in·flex·i·bly \-bl?\ adverb
synonyms inflexible, obdurate, adamant mean unwilling to alter a predetermined course or purpose. inflexible implies rigid adherence or even slavish conformity to principle <inflexible in their demands>. obdurate stresses hardness of heart and insensitivity to appeals for mercy or the influence of divine grace <obdurate in his refusal to grant clemency>. adamant implies utter immovability in the face of all temptation or entreaty <adamant that the work should continue>.
synonyms see in addition stiff
- Merriam-Webster Dictionary: inflexible

HA! Merriam-Webster doesn’t have an entry for neuroplasticity. I guess they’re Republicans too.

I have to give a speech on evolution…help? - Yahoo! Answers

My nephew would tell you that a shark doesn’t turn into a chair.

Darwin and Wallace were the first guys to write about evolution.

Darwin got his ideas while traveling around the world and seeing all kinds of animals. The ship was called the “Beagle.” You’ll want to talk about Galapagos Island, where he saw different species of birds in a place so far from the continent that they had to have all come from one ancestor. He thought that their beaks were shaped by what food their ancestors ate. Seeds vs. berries vs. bugs, etc. Don’t forget the tortoises.

There are different theories of how evolution occurs.

**Lamarck** said that species evolve because acquired traits are passed down through the generations. Like giraffes stretching their necks up to get leaves makes their offspring have longer necks. (not true)

Darwin believed that evolution was a slow process of population drifting in response to the environment. The average height of a giraffe changes each generation because the short ones all died. (closer, but not quite)

Basically, evolution occurs when something in the environment - Nature - kills off certain animals and let others live. So if the short-necked giraffes always died there would only be taller giraffes left to reproduce. But the next valley over the trees might be really short so the tall giraffes have trouble reaching down and after a couple of generations only short giraffes are left. So now there are two different animals. This is called “Natural Selection.”

Darwin, like most people of his time, believed that offspring were a blend of their parents traits, like a black cat and a white cat have grey kittens and after that all kittens are grey. (not true) He had trouble believing his own theory, and waited many years to publish it. Actually, he published it only after he found out that Wallace had the same ideas.

**Mendel** came up with modern genetics, where there are dominant and recessive genes. So black cats can have white kittens, orange tabby kittens, and black kittens.

Another theory is that small mutations - like birth defects - might make an animal better suited. Maybe a horse had a long-necked colt that could eat from taller trees so it survived. After enough generations the mutations add up until the horse looks like a giraffe. Obviously some mutations don’t help at all, or even kill. It’s random. Some folks can’t handle randomness - everything has to be planned in advance or they freak out.

Still another theory is that small changes aren’t good enough - there had to be a miracle to change one species to another. They always say that the eye had to be a miracle because it’s so complex, but they forget to tell you about lizards with light-sensing patches in their skin instead of eyeballs, or about lower mammals whose species can’t see colors yet. ANY eye is an evolutionary advantage over no eyes at all, even if it’s only a light-sensing patch.

The main thing is that to be scientific, you have to be willing to change your theory to match what you observe. It’s not enough for some scientist to tell you “THIS IS TRUE.” You get to go out and prove it for yourself - or even disprove it! Anybody who doesn’t let you question their theory is trying to control your mind. And that, my young friend, is politics.

Darwin loves you, man.

Technorati: Charles+Darwin evolution LaMarck Galagapos+Island Origin+of+Species acquired+traits mutations natural+selection Gregor+Mendel genetics scientific+theory

In WWII the Germans ran into Russia killing everyone they found. They destroyed entire villages, an entire way of life. In some parts of Russia 1 in 4 people died. Every family was affected.

However, the Germans awakened a sleeping giant. And when U.S. General George Patton realized just how big Russia was, he wanted our army to march right through Germany and into Russia to get at them while they were still recovering from Germany’s predations. There was a big antisemitic component to this that I don’t wish to go into at this time.

Remember that at the same time we were taking back Europe, we were also fighting in the Pacific theater. Japan was throwing Mitsubishi Zeros at us - yup, made by the same company that makes cars and Three Diamonds tuna. The kamakazi pilots literally committed suicide by ramming our ships with planes. They had already been at war with China for years before Pearl Harbor and they were pretty much tapped out.

Kamakazi means “divine wind” after a Chinese attack that was thwarted by high winds in the Sea of Japan.

Despite the fact that we had pretty much won against Japan, in 1949 we dropped atomic bombs on two important cities. Not on the Mitsubishi plant where Zeros were manufactured but a few miles away on a city full of civilians.

Why???

To impress the Russians that we were technologically superior.

The Russians hurried up to create their own atomic bomb. We upgraded to hydrogen bombs, which use an atomic bomb as an igniter. Russia upgraded.

The government created a big Communism scare to get the American people to fund this massive effort. We used smaller nations as proxies to test our technology against other countries that acted as Russia’s proxies.

We engaged in a “space race” that started with Russia’s Sputnik satellite in 1957 and culminated in our first steps on the moon in 1969.

Both of us developed Intercontinental Ballistic Missile Systems (ICBMs) to deliver nukes. We both developed sophisticated anti-nuke systems to shoot down ICBMs. We had enough missiles to destroy each other 30 times over - this is called “overkill.”

In 1962, JFK had a standoff with Russia’s Khrushchev over missile sites in Cuba, just 90 miles away from the US. The Cuban Missile Crisis was the closest we ever came to Thermonuclear Armageddon.

In the 1980’s President Reagan wanted to fill the sky with killer satellites. My favorite idea was “Rods of God,” in which satellites would carry up huge titanium rods that they could drop out of the sky on our enemies. These people were so wrapped up in it that they’d destroy the world if they had to.

Needless to say, we had a worldwide spy network to keep tabs on all this.

Fortunately for us, and devastatingly for the citizens of the USSR, they ran out of money before we did. I guess that means we won, but winning put the US so far in debt to foreign investors that we’ll still be paying it for another generation.

War, even a Cold War, is expensive.

That’s the cold war, the technological rivalry. We never actually fired a shot at each other, but we spent 40 years trying to prove our cajones were bigger than theirs.

Putin seems to trying to reconstitute the old Soviet Union. This time around, we’ve already thrown billions of dollars at the non-war in the Middle East and it is crumbling our economy. I don’t know where it will go.

Technorati: Kamakazi divine+wind Mitsubishi+Zero Three+Diamonds WWI atomic+bomb cold+war Nazi General+Patton Hiroshima Nagasaki sputnik Intercontinental+Ballistic+Missile ICBM communism+scare space+race Soviet+Union

moar funny pictures

“My mother always said democracy is the best revenge.”
– Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, son of assassinated Pakistani politician Benazir Bhutto, quoted in Time Magazine, January 14, 2008