Pharyngula

Posted by: AZ Writer (Kim Hosey) | March 23, 2010 12:35 PM

Nope. Usually I hear about testes from my son and his friend, during a conversation about whether they are or are not part of one's anus. I think I prefer David Attenborough's narration.

Posted by: Sven DiMilo | March 23, 2010 12:39 PM

"12 feet long, and highly mobile"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxoO5yrabfc

Posted by: simply not edible | March 23, 2010 1:02 PM

It is indeed rare to hear David Attenborough talk about his sex life.

Posted by: Bobber | March 23, 2010 1:06 PM

Sven:

How appropriate that "Going Mobile" should appear on the album "Who's Next" - which is what the whale mating scrum appeared to be all about.

Posted by: Janine, Mistress Of Foul Mouth Abuse, OM | March 23, 2010 1:08 PM

CHIMPY!

Posted by: burpy | March 23, 2010 1:11 PM

White whales plural? There is only one white whale, and I have pledged my life to hunt him down and kill him. These look more like southern right whales to me.

Posted by: Sili | March 23, 2010 1:19 PM

It's not often you hear about testes weighing a ton and pumping out gallons of sperm from David Attenborough.

Posted by: daveau | March 23, 2010 1:23 PM

It's not often you hear about testes weighing a ton and pumping out gallons of sperm from David Attenborough.

But you hear Oprah say it all the time.

Posted by: cicely | March 23, 2010 1:30 PM

And, because the last Thread struck me as a little light on the subject...

BaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconBaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconBaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconBaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconBaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconBaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconBaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconBaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconBaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconBaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconBaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbaconbacon

Posted by: cicely | March 23, 2010 1:32 PM

Damned Thread ate most of my bacon!

Posted by: David Marjanović | March 23, 2010 1:35 PM

Once we've voted and/or schismed on the Buffy/River issue, we can get down to the serious argument: Gilgamesh vs. Odysseus, freestyle wrestling. Place your bets.*

Odysseus might be weaker, and he's not 2/3 divine, but he's smarter. I expect a Combat Pragmatist moment.

*automatically includes Shamash vs. Athena on the divine plane.

Might turn out the same way.

David, if Josh has not experienced anything from alternative medicine first hand, we are all to assume he is some sort of a benevolent hater? Sort of his gift to the world, hating things randomly? Someone should get him a Gandhi award. Oh, wait, that would be a KKK hood. Gay…hating randomly… no irony bells going off in the ol’ Joshosphere?

What?

my point was that if you lot had your way, we wouldn’t look into the effects of herbs at all.

And what… the fuck… makes you think so?

I suppose your strawman'll finally burn (and brightly at that) if you pour some chlorine trifluoride over it. If all you have is oxygen, you'll have to wait till it dries, you've wanked so much over it.

The anatomy of a skeptic:

A fictional ad-hominem argument! LOL! Haven't read such silliness in a long time. :-D

18 year old English major.

:-D :-D :-D

A few subthreads ago we discussed our ages. Our educations and occupations have also come up repeatedly. Maybe you'd like to keep up? Nooo, you're just bullshitting.

Creates “newspaper,” and delivers said paper to Quack’s neighborhood in the predawn hours. Frightens disabled retirees who think he is a burgular.

??? ??? ???
??? ??? ???
??? ??? ???

.. whooaa dude, you did NOT just refer to yourself as attractive did you? *snort*.

Wow. That was so bizarre I didn't even understand it at first.

How many people here, Quack, do you think have ever looked at a photo of you? What do we care what you look like?!?

<headshake>

I'd probably also explain why I think the expression "I'll pray for you" is actually not friendly at all because it really means "I think you are acting immorally and should die in a fire"

Or, at best, "I think someone should help you, but I'm not going to do it – I'll just sit down and fantasize about it happening on its own, somehow".

Oh, and please respect me enough not to pray for me... I find it insulting, demeaning and degrading. Save it for yourself or for those who wish it. I don't walk up to you and slap you upside the head just because I think you need it, so please show me the same courtesy. No prayers, thanks.

<pft> Why not just "if you feel like wasting your time, go ahead"? Maybe print out one of those studies on the effectiveness of prayer and hand it to him.

You know what is ironic? Reader comments on the headline news story at Huffington Post about Google pulling out of China because of censorship being, you guessed it, fucking censored.

LOL!

Did you read the thread over at Neurologica David Marjanović linked a while back where Steven Novella and his commenters absolutely slaughtered the dim little ducky?

I linked to that? I don't even remember… and I don't read that blog in the first place… oh, there's a connection to the Wordpress blog that got shut down because it exposed Andreas Moritz, so maybe I found it in a Pharyngula thread about that incident… still don't remember it, though.

It's quite the trouncing, though. A study says something about the common cold, and Maloney pretends it's about the flu!?! That's… rich.

Ducks are cool.

Ducks are interesting. Cool, however? Ducks regularly engage in gang rape.

whose name is frequently mistaken for that of another cetacean

Well, that's what it is in the original French.

White whales plural? There is only one white whale, and I have pledged my life to hunt him down and kill him. These look more like southern right whales to me.

LOL! Yes, right, not white.

Posted by: Givesgoodemail | March 23, 2010 1:43 PM

...and now for something disturbingly different. Dan Savage may well have hit it on the head this time.

Posted by: Bill Dauphin, OM | March 23, 2010 1:51 PM

David:

whose name is frequently mistaken for that of another cetacean

Well, that's what it is in the original French.

Yah, I know, but that's a bridge too far for most 'Murricans I talk to about my name. Frequently when I have to give my name for some official purpose, I'll spell it, and then add "like the French prince; not like the fish." Occasionally I'll get a patronizing little correction about the fact that porpoises are mammals, not fish, and in those cases I'm compelled to remind my instructor of the existence of mahi-mahi. "Like the French prince, not like the popular marine mammal" just wouldn't have the same euphonious charm! ;^)

BTW, your quote is the only the second bit of evidence that anyone read my just-under-the-portcullis comment. Good to know it didn't go entirely to waste.

Posted by: daveau | March 23, 2010 1:57 PM

Gallons? Eww! I'll never swim in the ocean ever!

Don't worry; they use a condom.

Posted by: Rutee, Shrieking Harpy of Dooooom | March 23, 2010 2:05 PM

Odysseus might be weaker, and he's not 2/3 divine, but he's smarter. I expect a Combat Pragmatist moment.

Posted by: Gyeong Hwa Pak, Scholar of Shen Zhou | March 23, 2010 2:07 PM

Does killfile work with IE?

Posted by: natural cynic | March 23, 2010 2:14 PM

For shame. It took 12 posts before someone rightly corrected PZ about the wrong whale. Losing pedant points ...

And Alan @29: You definitely don't want a whale to turn "viscous". They're much harder to reel in if they turn into a gooey blob.

Posted by: blf | March 23, 2010 2:20 PM

For anyone who recalls the hilarious incident when Pandit Surinder Sharma, a self-described Tantrik Magician, tried, on Indian TV, to kill Sanal Edamaruku, president of Rationalist International, with magic, Edamaruku has a penned a piece in The Grauniad about it: The night a guru tried to kill me on TV.

Posted by: Janine, Mistress Of Foul Mouth Abuse, OM | March 23, 2010 2:35 PM

This part of the column that blf linked if absolutely fucking terrifying.

Recently, we were able to put behind bars, with the help of a TV documentary, a tantric who used to make his living with a dangerous stunt of rare brutality: he trampled on the bodies of little infants brought to him in hundreds by their illiterate parents to benefit from the godly powers of his feet. A local politician and high priest, to whom I talked during the programme, defended the holy man in the name of religion. This shows the complexity of the problem.

Just for that, Sanal Edamaruku has achieved greatness.

Posted by: Alan B | March 23, 2010 2:49 PM

#34 FareFair cop!

Posted by: MultiTool | March 23, 2010 3:00 PM

Something disturbing to chew on...

"Fair play also rose substantially among volunteers who subscribed to Christianity or Islam, as opposed to local religions. "

Via Science News:

_Farming's rise cultivated fair deals_
http://sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/57417/title/Farmings_rise_cultivated_fair_deals

Posted by: DominEditrix | March 23, 2010 3:29 PM

An old zoologist friend of mine, when a young and naïve student, was sent by her department to retrieve the testes of a whale that had washed up dead from the Atlantic. Being unversed in marine mammals [and even less versed in homo sapiens], she took her car, a Volkswagen Beetle. The grizzled marine mammalogist on site sent her back for a pick-up truck.

Posted by: Jadehawk OM, Hardcore Left-Winger | March 23, 2010 3:49 PM

Did the quack really try to insult us by saying we hang out on the internet too much?

lol. There's a reason they call Gen Y the Net Generation. The internet is our natural habitat, and trying to insult us by pointing this out really just reveals how deeply behind the times the Quack is.

Oh, and as someone who used to have those painful week-long periods, let me just say that Menstruation is not a disease, you misogynist fuckgnome. Also, it wasn't quack pseudomedicine that helped against the pain. It was real medicine, from Big Pharma and Evil Doctors In White Coats. And it came with the bonus of birth control. And I didn't have to pay for it. l0z3Я.

Posted by: Celtic_Evolution | March 23, 2010 3:58 PM

You can't have a thread XLII without some Douglas Adams:

Hmmm... I also like to inject most of my days with a little musical solace from Scott B. Adams

Posted by: Paul | March 23, 2010 4:28 PM

Just read in the Intersection comment section:

there is an online poll at MSNBC where more than two hundred thousand people have expressed their anger at the bill, wishing that it should be repealed. Again, this is two hundred thousand people since the bill was passed in the House of Representatives last night. This may be anecdotal evidence, but it is anecdotal evidence which seems to support the result of that CNN poll.

The number of angry people at that online MSNBC poll is now more than four hundred thousand people.

Guess who! He likes to complain about Pharyngula and poll crashing, but when it reflects teabag sentiments somehow online polls are as legitimate as Pew.

Posted by: Celtic_Evolution | March 23, 2010 4:44 PM

Guess who! He likes to complain about Pharyngula and poll crashing, but when it reflects teabag sentiments somehow online polls are as legitimate as Pew.

Meh... kwahk-a-doodle-doo understands politics about as well as he understands anything else. Pretty poorly.

He still thinks the bill can be simply repealed if the rethugs win back the house and senate. Forgetting of course that they'd have to win back a full filibuster-proof majority (pipe-dreaming, buddy) and that a repeal also requires a presidential signature. Ain't gonna happen.

Not to mention, I'd love to see the repugs try that one out... tell the american people "oh, you know that law we have where insurance companies can't deny coverage to sick kids and can't drop coverage for people who get sick? Yeeeeaaahhhh... we're gonna go ahead and overturn that". Good luck with that. (Those changes go into effect in 6 mos... not 2014 like other parts of the bill)

Posted by: Paul | March 23, 2010 4:52 PM

He still thinks the bill can be simply repealed if the rethugs win back the house and senate. Forgetting of course that they'd have to win back a full filibuster-proof majority (pipe-dreaming, buddy) and that a repeal also requires a presidential signature. Ain't gonna happen.

The presidential signature doesn't matter, that Dick Morris guy he's been thoroughly rimming sez that not only will the Repubs win the House/Senate, but Obama signed himself into a one-term presidency with Obamacare.

Not to mention, I'd love to see the repugs try that one out... tell the american people "oh, you know that law we have where insurance companies can't deny coverage to sick kids and can't drop coverage for people who get sick? Yeeeeaaahhhh... we're gonna go ahead and overturn that".

More possible than you'd think. If it was going to be done, the taxpayer wouldn't even know. It would just taxed onto another military spending bill. AMERICA, FUCK YEAH!

Did Kwok ever give up on his birther stance? I'd ask, but I'm trying to minimize engagement, and he can really go off the rails when you talk about past engagements or statements he's made.

Posted by: Ray Moscow | March 23, 2010 5:27 PM

I've actually watched these guys breed off the South African coast. I just didn't realise they were so awesome at it.

(And my pics aren't as good, either.)

Posted by: 'Tis Himself, OM | March 23, 2010 5:32 PM

Did Kwok ever give up on his birther stance? I'd ask, but I'm trying to minimize engagement, and he can really go off the rails when you talk about past engagements or statements he's made.

I want to know if Kw*k has ever repudiated this bit of treason:

If we do become the USSA, then I am hopeful that our military will honor their oaths to defend the U. S. Constitution by any means necessary, including a military coup d’etat against the Messiah.

Posted by: Rachel Bronwyn | March 23, 2010 5:47 PM

Where's the white whale? I don't see any belugas.

I remember seeing this clip a number of years ago and being deeply alarmed by the mobility of the animal's penis. No means no! Even if your penis can still reach her when she's upside down, trying to avoid you.

Our humpbacks are "in season" and the males are becoming very aggressive. I haven't witnessed any mating yet (I always turn away anyways because I feel like I'm invading their privacy) but the boys are rough housing a lot. One of the younger guys had a number of tubercles on his rostrum torn off and was quite bloody. It was upsetting.

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | March 23, 2010 6:17 PM

Another scientific "that's funny" moment.

Posted by: Carlie | March 23, 2010 6:34 PM

WorldNutDaily will now wage war on Easter.

I...what...blargh.

Posted by: Gyeong Hwa Pak, Scholar of Shen Zhou | March 23, 2010 6:41 PM

What's a fuckgnome?

Posted by: Walton | March 23, 2010 6:50 PM

And when I describe myself as "Pharyngula's token voice of conservatism", what I mean is that I don't support taxing the pants off the rich, abolishing capitalism, expropriating the property of corporations, or establishing a new socio-economic order based on democratic workers' collectives. This makes me moderate by the standards of everywhere else in the world, but makes me a right-wing troglodyte by the standards of some of the regulars here. :-)

Posted by: Pygmy Loris | March 23, 2010 6:55 PM

arakrys,

Gallons? Eww! I'll never swim in the ocean ever

You know, they shit in the ocean too. Think about all the marine animals swimming about, shitting in our beautiful oceans. Fuckers. :)

Posted by: Walton | March 23, 2010 7:00 PM

Paul, "conservative" can be a relative term. I'm "conservative" compared to the more hardcore left-wing regulars here, such as Knockgoats, SC, negentropyeater and Pygmy Loris, who advocate radical changes to the current socio-economic and political order. It just depends with whom you're comparing me.

Posted by: John Morales | March 23, 2010 7:03 PM

Walton:

... I don't support taxing the pants off the rich ...

Who here does?

Posted by: Walton | March 23, 2010 7:03 PM

Feynmaniac @#71: It sounds great, but it wouldn't work in the real world.

Posted by: Walton | March 23, 2010 7:08 PM

Sorry, Jadehawk. For the avoidance of any doubt, I hereby award you the title of Hardcore Left-Winger. :-)

Posted by: Paul | March 23, 2010 7:09 PM

Paul, "conservative" can be a relative term. I'm "conservative" compared to the more hardcore left-wing regulars here, such as Knockgoats, SC, negentropyeater and Pygmy Loris, who advocate radical changes to the current socio-economic and political order. It just depends with whom you're comparing me.

Based on your past statements, your positions generally do not fit with the Conservative party in England. That was the frame I had in mind. It seems odd to call yourself a voice for conservatism when your positions are more liberal than those currently in place (what are you trying to conserve, aside from the monarchy and fox hunts?).

Posted by: maureen.brian#b5c92 | March 23, 2010 7:09 PM

Come North, young Walton, where all things are possible.

This, for instance.

Posted by: Jadehawk OM, Hardcore Left-Winger | March 23, 2010 7:13 PM

Come North, young Walton, where all things are possible.

This, for instance.

Posted by: Walton | March 23, 2010 7:15 PM

I should be clear that I'm fully aware of (and have mentioned in the past) the existence of co-operative businesses run by workers or consumers, such as the John Lewis Partnership or the various Co-operative Societies in the UK. I'm fully in favour of these kinds of co-operatives. In a free society, people are free to choose other forms of business ownership besides the traditional corporation. If they can compete with other businesses in a free market - as they clearly can, since the businesses I mentioned above are very successful - then there is no reason why anyone should be against it.

But I don't see that this has any broader application for the wider economy. I would obviously be strongly opposed to the idea of expropriating corporate property and transferring it to worker ownership.

Posted by: maureen.brian#b5c92 | March 23, 2010 7:18 PM

Walton,

What created the value / wealth / whatever to which those very corporations now cling so determinedly?

Posted by: John Morales | March 23, 2010 7:20 PM

aratina, heh.

Of course Walton was snidely referring to progressive taxation, because percentages are what matter to him, not the net benefit.

When a person A (who earns 12x what person B earns) only ends up with 8x times the disposable income of person B after tax, Walton is appalled at such injustice.

Posted by: Pygmy Loris | March 23, 2010 7:27 PM

Feynmaniace #71,

That sounds an awful lot like what I think. Walton was wondering several threads ago what kind of cultural crises lead to major structural changes. I think we may be approaching that sort of severe crisis now. In the next few decades there are several major influences that are probably going to cause major crises in the distribution of the necessities of life. Peak oil, global climate change, labor excess due to rising population, rising population itself, are all serious issues on their own. The confluence of these issues is going to be very very bad if we, as a species, cannot abandon our short-term views for rather long-term ones.

Walton's concerns for civil liberties are noble and I share many of those same concerns, but people as a whole tend to care far less about liberties when they are scared or hungry. It is very worrying that in the next few decades we are probably going to see much higher levels of fear and hunger as food security decreases due to various pressures (transportation costs, fertilizer shortages, rising populations, climate change, etc.) This is the main reason I want major changes now.

If we have systems and structural institutions in place to help people during times of desperation, our social systems, including various forms of democracy, are more likely to survive. I don't particularly care for the idea of living in a dictatorship (notice I'm not trying to move to North Korea or Cuba), so I want these problems addressed before people become too willing to sacrifice liberty for food and physical security.

Posted by: Ol'Greg | March 23, 2010 7:35 PM

but makes me a right-wing troglodyte by the standards of some of the regulars here. :-)

You'd be considered a liberal here where I live. I remember the first time some one called me a liberal as an invective. It was surreal. Some one said "Human beings weren't created to drink milk."

I replied, "Well I don't think we were ever created but some people certainly can drink milk," and shrugged.

"Ugh. That's because you're a fucking liberal."

Ummmm...evolution is not a political ideology.

FIN

Posted by: Jadehawk OM, Hardcore Left-Winger | March 23, 2010 7:36 PM

but people as a whole tend to care far less about liberties when they are scared or hungry.

Posted by: Jadehawk OM, Hardcore Left-Winger | March 23, 2010 7:42 PM

You'd be considered a liberal here where I live.

I actually had someone once proudly tell me that their family (farmers) was hiding most of their crops during the Great Depression to avoid redeistribution. And all I could think was "you're proud that your family caused others to suffer starvation?"

Posted by: Walton | March 23, 2010 7:45 PM

Ol'Greg,

You'd be considered a liberal here where I live.

I'm not surprised. I'd probably be considered a flaming liberal in many parts of the US, by virtue of the fact that I strongly oppose creationism; support full equal rights for gay, lesbian and transgender people; am pro-choice; think immigration is a good thing; and believe that everyone, including "terror suspects", is entitled to a fair trial, freedom from arbitrary detention and freedom from torture. Reading Pharyngula and Dispatches regularly reminds me that many American "conservatives" are, to put it bluntly, batshit insane.

Posted by: Walton | March 23, 2010 7:48 PM

America had the financial wherewithall to fund massive projects -- the space program, for example -- which not only pushed the frontiers of science but also paid off economically.

The space programme "paid off economically"? How exactly?

Posted by: John Morales | March 23, 2010 7:53 PM

Walton, miniaturisation, just to name one outcome, was not of insignificance.

Posted by: iambilly | March 23, 2010 8:10 PM

John Morales: Thanks, but you forgot some parenthese -- I am (((Billy))) The Atheist (the only reason I go by iambilly here is because of Wordpress passwords).

Walton: Communications satellites, miniaturization, computer technology, communications technology -- Fox News couldn't beam necon propaganda around the world without some of the advances financed by NASA and created through public/private partnerships.

Pygmy Loris: And it ain't a new strategy -- during the civil rights era, local law enforcement officers and politicians claimed that civil rights marches would lead to bloodshed and then went out and created the bloodshed which they then pointed to as proof that the civil rights movement was evil.

I don't like paying taxes. However, with an effective federal tax rate for 2009 of 4.8%, I feel grossly undertaxed considering the (reduced because of GOP mismanagement) services I receive. Even if I include local, state and property taxes, my effective tax rate is only about 11%. No way in hell can we keep this country afloat (including private industry) without an effective infrastructure and the only way we can do that is by actually, you know, paying for it?

Posted by: KOPD | March 23, 2010 8:26 PM

Walton,

It sounds like you're a social liberal and fiscal conservative. Certainly not unheard of.

Posted by: iambilly | March 23, 2010 8:31 PM

John Morales and Feynmaniac: Something that the nattering nabobs of neoconservatism fail to understand is the way that these public/private partnerships, partnerships between federal agencies and private companies for the development of new technologies, create jobs, create wealth, and create a larger GNP (which of course, creates a larger tax base which could (prior to our 30-year experiment in fantasy economics) reinvested in new programs to develop even more new technologies). This computer on which I am typing is a descendent of federal partnership (whatever the earlier incarnation of Lincoln Labs was) to create computers (back in the days when 'debugging' meant removing the dead moths from where ever they were when they electricuted themselves)for artillery tables.

Posted by: https://www.google.com/accounts/o8/id?id=AItOawnb-E55g7vrnvH-3L1M6d7QuDYWoM_IDEM | March 23, 2010 8:33 PM

The title of the video is incorrect.
They are Southern Wright Whales, not "White" whales.
Unless it is some lame joke about Moby Dick.

Posted by: Ol'Greg | March 23, 2010 8:43 PM

I'm for taxing the pants off of the rich.

But only the pants. I envision a ruling class of pantsless elites.

Posted by: Ol'Greg | March 23, 2010 8:51 PM

Walton you're like meeeee! Oh huggles :D

You're gonna love it. You're too hot or too cold in any room you enter.

Although honestly I consider myself a fiscal moderate. Then again consider that where I live fiscal conservative very nearly means somewhere from neocon to far right libertarian.

Posted by: Pygmy Loris | March 23, 2010 8:58 PM

Walton,

Having considered the question further, I support the current system of progressive taxation.

Here in the states you're a liberal.

Reading Pharyngula and Dispatches regularly reminds me that many American "conservatives" are, to put it bluntly, batshit insane.

Well, yeah ;P

Posted by: iambilly | March 23, 2010 9:00 PM

'Tis Himself: Near as I can remember, up until the late 1970s, there was an unwritten compact between labour and management -- whenever better technology created higher productivity, the increased income was split among investors, labour and management. Since the advent of neoconservatism, labour has been left out of the equation.

The worship of the almighty stock price has created a dissincentive to any business which decides to treat their workers well. The CEO of Costco provides above-average wages and benefits and it kills the company's stock price.

How the hell did we end up with a system that disincetivises treating your workers well?

With that, I'm off to bed. Reading a new history of the crusades. Excellent. Deals with the economics, theology, and politics equally well.

Posted by: David Marjanović | March 23, 2010 9:00 PM

Not daring to use images.google.com, I found...

"An term used in extreme annoyance and fury to an individual exhibiting the characteristics of an obnoxious asshole, while being extremely unattractive, almost troll-like. A term first used in the early 60's to exemplify individuals who engaged in unprotected sex with many partners while being unable to afford devices for hair-removal. Over the years the term has varied in accordance with each generat[i]onal use. From the late 70's to the mid 90's the term was once again changed to describe an extremely unattractive male actor in pornography, coined by comedian Pablo Garcia in his usual stand-up routine."

So... it's a bit like "mendacious intellectual pornography", only it's not such a... random assortment of ejumacated words :-)

Plus, it's the perfect response to his self-description as attractive. X-)

For shame. It took 12 posts before someone rightly corrected PZ about the wrong whale. Losing pedant points ...

In my defense, I was writing comment 22 while the new subthread was being created. When I clicked on "submit", I got the usual "comment submission failed – comments are not allowed on this entry" message.

Edamaruku has a penned a piece in The Grauniad about it:

=8-)

The last two sentences are the best!

Just annoying that I get the "an error has occurred" error from the YouTube video.

From the text:

In different cultures, sense of humour varies. In the south Indian state of Kerala, from where I come, many people have great fun with this arguably shortest joke anywhere in circulation: A dog tried to open a coconut. And what happened? you may ask. Well, nothing; that's the joke. It did not work, of course.

A pig walks around the corner and is gone.

I can't imagine this hasn't been shared yet, but I will anyway, just in case.

It has been, several times, years ago :-)

For the maximum awesomeness experience, read the beginning of Ecclesiastes.

More possible than you'd think. If it was going to be done, the taxpayer wouldn't even know. It would just taxed onto another military spending bill. AMERICA, FUCK YEAH!

...I'm feeling... woozy all of a sudden.

I think the Rs are going to find that taking reform away from people after the fact is going to be a much harder sell than scaring them about it in prospect was.

Absolutely.

Especially after a few months, when they start to notice the utter lack of Soviet¹ tanks in their streets!

¹ Yes, it's an anachronism; how is that not appropriate to a discussion of Republican tactics on this issue?

:-D

You hit it perfectly.

I remember seeing this clip a number of years ago and being deeply alarmed by the mobility of the animal's penis.

See elephants for a remarkable case of convergence.

my best guess is that the economic situation isn't going to get better

It will, even if only because the next bubble will come.

Another scientific "that's funny" moment.

Fucking fantastic.

From there:

That was in 1995. Heber-Katz couldn’t wait to study the phenomenon in depth. But her colleagues counseled against it, urging her not to waste her expertise in the field of autoimmune disease and transplant rejection. They advised her to pursue the disappearing ear holes as “an aside,” like a hobby.

WTF. Seriously!?!

You know, they shit in the ocean too. Think about all the marine animals swimming about, shitting in our beautiful oceans. Fuckers. :)

I like drinking small amounts of seawater. Tastes good :-)

Sorry, Jadehawk. For the avoidance of any doubt, I hereby award you the title of Hardcore Left-Winger. :-)

<fist up>

Friendship! ;-)

indeed, personal liberties have only become such a major rallying point because we live in a post-scarcity bubble. I bet once it bursts group rights will become far more important than individual freedoms again.

I don't think it's that bad. Education has a major impact. If you don't know that democracy has ever been tried, you're hardly going to organize a revolution to install democracy...

I think that genie is pretty much out of the bottle.

Posted by: Ol'Greg | March 23, 2010 9:06 PM

Don't worry Ichthyic, he's English. English people are treated like gold here although everyone is basically afraid of them... and they're always socialists.

Posted by: David Marjanović | March 23, 2010 9:15 PM

I actually had someone once proudly tell me that their family (farmers) was hiding most of their crops during the Great Depression to avoid redeistribution.

<facepalm>

Posted by: Jadehawk OM, Hardcore Left-Winger | March 23, 2010 9:39 PM

I just got carried away and talked about the next step. Through things like unlimited wiretapping and lack of a sufficiently rigorous constitution, personal liberties can go away while a democracy is still there, but I don't think that's a stable state for a political system – when the mighty cut freedoms, they make themselves more powerful

Posted by: Sven DiMilo | March 23, 2010 9:47 PM

Well.

I'm pretty drunk.
Southampton Biere de Mars or Marz ? (my spelling in French is pretty bad); very delicious; and then maybe a Stout or 2? Keegan Mother's Milk, as I recall...

anyway.

here's a tune:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBTa1ldYrtM

Posted by: John Morales | March 23, 2010 9:52 PM

Brass bosoms back on deck... the kite flying was...extended a day or two. ;)

Woo-hoo!

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | March 23, 2010 9:55 PM

Is that a spring in Patricia's post, and a sparkle in the wording?

Posted by: John Morales | March 23, 2010 9:59 PM

Sven,

here's a tune:

You're pretty drunk, allright.

Posted by: Patricia, Ignorant Slut OM | March 23, 2010 10:03 PM

slut - don't it make your brown eyes blue?

Posted by: Pygmy Loris | March 23, 2010 10:04 PM

Patricia,

OK - Brass bosoms back on deck... the kite flying was...extended a day or two. ;)

Woohoo :)

Posted by: David Marjanović | March 23, 2010 10:06 PM

I see I'm really going to have to think about this and try writing it down more coherently.

Looking forward to it.

slut

:-D

Congratulations, Patricia!

Posted by: Josh, Official SpokesGay | March 23, 2010 10:12 PM

@Patrici, #137:

For your impudence, I cut your bar tab by half, and hang up your paddle until Thursday. Out of line at the spanking couch my lad. --->!

Umm. .but. . is there any chance I can shorten my dry spell and take it out in trade? If I promise to polish your Brass Breast Plate with a gentle cleansing powder such as Bon Ami? Remember, it hasn't scratched yet™.

Posted by: Josh, Official SpokesGay | March 23, 2010 10:22 PM

BTW Patricia:

Glad to hear you're still . .ahem. . flying kites with that gentleman. I hope it's as sweet as it sounds:)

Posted by: KOPD | March 23, 2010 10:30 PM

Yes, fiscal moderate. That's what happens when I open my mouth. I say something inaccurate right about the time that people who know what they're saying chime in. You'd think I'd know better by now.

Posted by: windy | March 23, 2010 10:34 PM

I envision a ruling class of pantsless elites.

Would that be like the ancient Greeks or Romans, or more like "the Emperor's new pants?"

Posted by: John Morales | March 23, 2010 10:36 PM

Epikt,

It [the space program] keeps me employed.

LOL.

I'm reminded Walton defended not banning fox-hunting on a very similar basis. :)

Posted by: John Morales | March 23, 2010 10:51 PM

David Marjanović just posted a response referring Asimov's The Relativity of Wrong to a woomeister-godbot, and this impels me to riffing by crossthredulation.

If only Asimov were commenting here.

Wouldn't that be nice?

Posted by: Feynmaniac | March 23, 2010 11:38 PM

I envision a ruling class of pantsless elites.

Sounds like a Monty Python skit.

Posted by: Epikt | March 24, 2010 12:04 AM

Ol'Greg:

Ahahahaha!!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=na_3r_bf5gA

I *must* find out where Ornette got that jacket.

Posted by: ambulocetacean | March 24, 2010 12:09 AM

Bill Dauphin (end of last endless thread),

Yes, unlucky that the portcullis came down on you. PZ can be a harsh mohel.

Um... with your daughter's friends who were pretending to be bi, am I right in assuming that they were all girls? I imagine that the trendiness of female bi-ness comes directly from the male fascination with "lesbian" porn. I can't imagine that too many straight boys would go around pretending to be bi.

Re the ambulocetacean moniker: Eh, it's a bit annoying. I started calling myself ambulocetus when I was arguing on Australian Christian blogs so that any creotard who could be bothered googling the word would get even more annoyed with me. When I came to register here ambulocetus was already taken, so I went with the even longer and more annoying ambulocetacean.

I should really consolidate my online identities. At some stage I'll go back to calling myself Perentie, which is what I went by when I used to get my jollies writing juvenile stuff like Mother Teresa appears in KY handprint.

Posted by: pcarini | March 24, 2010 12:20 AM

Ichthyic @ 153

questions?

Who's going to do the grunt work of gathering all the recipes MAJeff's recipes he posted? Do straws need to be drawn?

(Great idea, though!)

Posted by: pcarini | March 24, 2010 12:23 AM

@my 162:

Better yet, who's going to do the grunt-work of reading my posts before I click submit?

*I also see that the commenting system now disallows multiple posts in a short time-frame...

Posted by: pcarini | March 24, 2010 12:32 AM

I'd hate to speak out of turn, but I was taught that a gentleman never takes measurements on the first date.

Posted by: Pygmy Loris | March 24, 2010 12:58 AM

Jen,

Thanks! I just bookmarked that website. I never know what to ask for salary.

Posted by: pcarini | March 24, 2010 1:31 AM

This board pile thing could be some manly rite that us gurrrrls just don't get...

As they say, if the board pile doesn't stack up...

Seriously, though, us guys are truly, profoundly lazy creatures. If he can be arsed to come over and measure boards I'd call that something, at least.

Unless you offered him beer to come check them out, in which case I'd say you can definitely call it a date ;)

Posted by: Caine, Fleur du mal | March 24, 2010 3:02 AM

Josh:

Attention Caine, Ol'Greg, Bride of Shrek and mah Auntie Ron (Sullivan) - I am accepting new GLOP applications and you're on the short list.

Why thank you, Darling. If it were me, I'd add Patricia, Jadehawk, A. Noyd, Pygmy Loris, Carlie and Jen to the list. That's jus' me though. ;) Here's my app: Oh, for Fuck's sake, another thread about Walton's politics. Now, where are my clothes...

Patricia:

OK - Brass bosoms back on deck... the kite flying was...extended a day or two. ;)

Ooooh, you must part with some small details here, M'lady. Were your socks knocked off? Or perhaps gone a bit askew?

Icthyic:

http://sites.google.com/a/crackergate.com/pharyngula-recipes/

You're a doll! Thank you.

Posted by: negentropyeater | March 24, 2010 3:47 AM

Pygmy Loris #159,

you can check this list to get some ideas:

http://www.salarylist.com/all-real-jobs-salary-at-american-international-group-inc-11.htm?order=2

Posted by: Ichthyic | March 24, 2010 4:08 AM

seriously.

look at the graphs on this page:

http://webpages.charter.net/almadizon/RealEstate.html

Jan 07:

I start planning my evacuation to Kiwiland, thinking my house is worth 350k.

dec 08: I finally complete my plans to get there, only to find my house is now worth...

210K

Brother moves into house, promises to sell it for me when the market comes back up...

current market value...

98K

mortgage:

90k

*sigh*

Posted by: Usagichan | March 24, 2010 4:21 AM

Ichthic,

I always think of the quote (by Laurence Peter - just looked it up to make sure I got it right) that "An economist is an expert who will know tomorrow why the things he predicted yesterday didn't happen today. "

When the next bubble happens, we will simply hear what initial assumption was incorrect (and you will be able to sell your house). Of course they might be right on this one (make enough predictions and you'll get some right in the end).

Posted by: John Morales | March 24, 2010 4:45 AM

Re bubbles (and more): I recommend this public-domain book.

Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds by Charles Mackay.

Posted by: Caine, Fleur du mal | March 24, 2010 7:04 AM

iambilly, I don't know about that, I'm rather fussy about who I like to see in a kilt. ;)

Posted by: Carlie | March 24, 2010 7:46 AM

I'm rather fussy about who I like to see in a kilt. ;)

Hamana - hamana - hamana

Posted by: iambilly | March 24, 2010 7:55 AM

Caine: I would much rather see them in a kilt than just plain pantsless.

Posted by: iambilly | March 24, 2010 8:16 AM

Caine, or we could tar and feather these malefactors of great wealth.

Ouch.

I just pictured Dick Cheney in a chicken suit.

Posted by: Caine, Fleur du mal | March 24, 2010 8:28 AM

Things I loathe this morning: spammers and annoying clients.

Things I love this morning: tea, cinnamon altoids and endless threads.

*Grumble* this whole day thing sucks *Grumble*

Posted by: Janine, Mistress Of Foul Mouth Abuse, OM | March 24, 2010 9:49 AM

I just pictured Dick Cheney in a chicken suit.

Is he going to be part of a staged hunt?

Posted by: Sili | March 24, 2010 10:08 AM

Think about all the marine animals swimming about, shitting in our beautiful oceans. Fuckers. :)

"I never drink water. Fish fuck in it."

--o--

Walton will be pleased to learn that my "Dagens I-lands Problem" has been solved by capitalism. I found some cheap(ish) knock-off ink-cartridges for my printer. (And for some reason they managed to send an original along instead of one of the copies. I guess I should be honest and pay them the difference, since I'm now opened in the packet ...)

In other stupid news, I thought I had an appointment with the GP tomorrow. Turned out to be today ... That's the second time I make that mistake. ARRGHH!

Posted by: iambilly | March 24, 2010 10:17 AM

Speaking of the mind going, blockquote fail in 195.

Posted by: Janine, Mistress Of Foul Mouth Abuse, OM | March 24, 2010 10:22 AM

Constance McMillens' rights were violated. But the school can still cancel prom anyways. Great news for LGBT teens in school. But it seems that homophobic school officials have an out, turn proms into "private" off campus events,

Posted by: Paul | March 24, 2010 10:46 AM

Have the utmost respect for Dick Morris, not the least because I’ve enjoyed his writing, value his thinking, and share something in common (We are both fellow alumni of the same high school, and I met him at an alumni event I had helped organize approximately eight years ago.). That doesn’t mean he is always right in his predictions, but I trust his judgement substantially more than that of another alumnus of our high school, White House Senior Advisor David Axelrod.

/sigh

Is there any way to get Kwok the help he very much needs? I mean, it's painful to watch.

Posted by: Paul | March 24, 2010 11:09 AM

If you want to be depressed, the Biocentrism guy has another post up about Huffpo titled Do You Only Live Once? Experiments Suggest Life Not One-Time Deal. It's really sad, how he has to resort to quantum woo about there being an infinite number of universes/possibilities to cope with his dead sister. I guess this is religion for people too smart to believe in the bearded dude in the clouds. Wouldn't be surprised if more people start going down that path.

Posted by: Sven DiMilo | March 24, 2010 11:10 AM

PZ can be a harsh mohel.

oo, ouch...that might be worse than "poopyhead"

Posted by: Ol'Greg | March 24, 2010 11:26 AM

it's easy to see how the existence of people whose whole sexual identity is based on the fact that they do choose between same-sex and opposite-sex relationships complicates things

But they still don't *choose* their sexual identity.

I never sat down and said to myself, I think I'll relate to people this way. Hell, I thought I was normal.

Posted by: Caine, Fleur du mal | March 24, 2010 11:37 AM

Ol'Greg, that's not what Bill meant. Bill was referring to what I said in the previous incarnation. In my experience, at least, one of the reasons people in the gay community have problems with bisexuals is that on a political level, they are seen as people who can make a sexual choice.

Idiots who oppose gay rights can fasten on to that as "evidence" that being gay is a choice. It's not and as I pointed out earlier, neither is being bisexual. However, bisexuality tends to make the politics more complex.

On top of that, bisexuals are also often viewed as someone who can consciously choose a hetero relationship, thereby bypassing the difficulties and obstacles faced by others.

Posted by: Ol'Greg | March 24, 2010 11:55 AM

Oh, I get it Caine. Wouldn't be the first time I misinterpreted BD. He's probably getting used to it now :P

Posted by: Carlie | March 24, 2010 12:08 PM

It's ok, Paul. We understand.
You could try Stealth Kiwi, an update of Kiwi Cloak, which itself was an update of Invisibility Cloak.

Posted by: Pygmy Loris | March 24, 2010 12:40 PM

Opus,

I, too, have read Perfectly Legal. Before I read it, I knew our tax system was screwed up, but afterwords I was in a mindless rage over how the rich get out of paying taxes while the wage slaves have very few options. Everything in that book in emblematic of why our country is falling apart. Grrr.

Posted by: Caine, Fleur du mal | March 24, 2010 1:01 PM

Bill, no worries. I had actually pointed out the bisexuality/political situation earlier in the previous thread, in response to Rorschach.

As for your friend, she might very well fit into the current definition of pansexual, which defines itself as gender blind, with a focus on romantic love. I expect she's the only one who knows how fluid her orientation is; there are other reasons she may have not expressed her preference during her time in Korea. She may not have realized her orientation at that time, either. Some people don't come to it until later in life for a variety of reasons.

Posted by: Bill Dauphin, OM | March 24, 2010 1:16 PM

Ol' Greg (@206):

But they still don't *choose* their sexual identity.

I know. As I said (@215) to Caine, she's probably already done a better job of 'splaining my position to you than I could have myself.

But so what if we did choose our sexual identities? The only reason the choice-versus-nature question even matters is that we, as a society, continue to demonize sexuality. If we saw all sexual identities as equally OK — as we would in any rational, non-demon-haunted world — it wouldn't make any difference whether sexual identity was chosen or indwelling.

IMHO, the fundamental argument for the social equality of all sexual identities should be based on the principle that sexual desire is personal, and that there's no compelling public interest in discriminating between private sexual feelings, nor in regulating private adult sexual behavior (as long as it's truly consensual, of course). Regardless of the truth of the matter, basing the political argument on it's not a choice risks being mischaracterized as equating non-mainstream sexualities with disability — "Don't discriminate against my disability, because I can't help it!" — and even successfully winning rights on such a basis fails to advance the ultimate cause (well, at least my ultimate cause; YMMV) of building a society in which sex is OK!

Posted by: Caine, Fleur du mal | March 24, 2010 1:25 PM

Bill:

fails to advance the ultimate cause (well, at least my ultimate cause; YMMV) of building a society in which sex is OK!

Which is where religion looms over all. It's religion which is ultimately hung up on sex, in one way or another; religions want to control sexuality, and you can't do that if people aren't listening to the rulez. People who don't really care about the religious aspect but have a personal "oh, that's not right!" reaction shelter under it to condemn any orientation they don't like.

Posted by: Sili | March 24, 2010 1:31 PM

So, is this yet another "random biological ejaculation"?

Posted by: Celtic_Evolution | March 24, 2010 1:36 PM

Quick vote: which is worse -- Cheney in a chicken suit or Cheney in a kilt?

Kilt, obviously. At least in a chicken suit he'd look like... well... a chicken. In the kilt he'd just look like a creepy, evil old man in a skirt.

But hey, thanks for the imagery... I will now go light my eyes on fire.

Posted by: stuv.myopenid.com | March 24, 2010 1:55 PM

Party people, just for effluvients and chuckles, count the what-the-funnelcakes in this nugget from our old friend Kwok:

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/2010/03/21/health-care-passes-the-house/#comment-54255

Have the utmost respect for Dick Morris, not the least because I’ve enjoyed his writing, value his thinking, and share something in common (We are both fellow alumni of the same high school, and I met him at an alumni event I had helped organize approximately eight years ago.). That doesn’t mean he is always right in his predictions, but I trust his judgement substantially more than that of another alumnus of our high school, White House Senior Advisor David Axelrod.

Posted by: iambilly | March 24, 2010 1:59 PM

MrFire: I bow to you. You are good.

Posted by: ambulocetacean | March 24, 2010 2:12 PM

Bill D, Boys pretending to be bi, eh? Wonders will never cease.