If you live in California, in the weeks leading up the last election you probably saw this commercial for goddamned Proposition 8 where a Massachusetts couple claims that their child was forced, apparently at gunpoint, to read gay porn in the guise of children's book (I'm not going to link to the video, because I don't want Youtube to think I'm some sort of crazy bigot, and start recommending me the KKK's channel or something). Of course, their claim was cleaned up a bit, their claim of hardcore pornography changed to "pro-gay literature" so that they wouldn't come off as obvious psychopaths.
Let's set aside the issues of free speech and censorship. Not even going to talk about it, for the moment it doesn't matter. Let's also set aside the fact that the book is obviously not a propaganda piece, but rather just an exposure to an alternative lifestyle. Let's set aside the fact that the book wasn't part of the school's curriculum, and belonged to one of the students who requested that the teacher read it. Let's even set aside the fact that the supposedly persecuted parents were the only ones actually making threats in the whole affair. All of these are good enough reasons to discount the opinions of these people, but that's not what I want to discuss right now. That discussion has already taken place, and I have nothing to add to it. No, I want to talk about their motives.
Given their persecution complex and ridiculously outspoken bigotry, it shouldn't surprise you to learn that this couple is Mormon. Within its history, Mormonism has always hid its wrongdoings under the cloak of the perceived religious intolerance against them. They whine that the entire state of Missouri declared war on them, neglecting to mention that war was started because they were stealing land in a violent coup. They point out that the country sent an army to kill Brigham Young, but leave out that he had sent the appointed governors back to Washington to deliver the message that if any further government officials were sent, they would be delivered back home in very small boxes. And recently, a white powdery substance was apparently delivered to the Mormon temples in California and Salt Lake, and it wouldn't surprise me at all if it were an inside job to garner sympathy for there cause in what has become a very hostile climate.
At this point, the Devil's Advocate jumps in to say, "So what if they're Mormon? Does that make them bad people?" No, not all Mormons are bad people. In fact, a few of them aren't even retarded! However this couple's response is the typical stratagem (Note the use of the singular, that's what we like to call wit!) of the Mormon organization. In fact one might begin to think that perhaps the couple might be insiders, taking their orders from within the superstructure of the Mormon church.
And one would be right. A recent memo from within the ranks of the Mormon church has been exposed, outlining their anti-gay twelve year plan. This memo mentions a man named Dick Wirthlin as a key member of the initiative. Turns out Dick's nephew is the man appearing in these inflammatory videos. And just who the hell is dear old Uncle Dick anyway? Ol' Dick Wirthlin at the time was a General Authority in the Church of Too Fucking Long a Name. To those who don't speak Mormonese, he's the equivalent of a Cardinal in the Catholic Church, pretty high up indeed.
Now here's the kicker, this memo was dated March 4, 1997. The Wirthlins filed their complaint in 2006. These people spent 9 years waiting for something vaguely offensive to happen so that they could scream about it loud enough to get national attention. And then all that media attention was wrapped up with a nice little bow and fed to an unwary public to pass a hateful piece of legislature.
This couple is just another arm of the Mormon church, whose influence has finally stepped just far enough over the line to gain some attention. In fact, as we speak this I-can't-believe-I'm-still-calling-it-a-church is being investigated for election fraud. Apparently they only reported five thousand dollars in contributions. For someone like me, who has seen first hand the organization of the Mormon wing of this campaign through my family, that number is almost precious. It's like asking a little kid how old they think the earth is, and they reply, "weally old, like a hundwed years!" You can't help but laugh at the naivete of someone who thought that number seemed plausible. Their budget is full of huge holes and unrecorded expenses, and one way or another, the Mormon Church is going to pay.
So to everyone who said that the Mormon Church wasn't that involved in Prop 8, you can kiss my ass. As far as I'm concerned, this isn't just a smoking gun. This is the moment caught on video camera, clear as day, and the Mormon church was caught holding the gun, masturbating on the corpse. And this is me flipping the bird at my childhood religion and saying, "Guess what, buddy? You're fucked."
And this is only the beginning.
Showing posts with label damned lies. Show all posts
Showing posts with label damned lies. Show all posts
Monday, December 1, 2008
Thursday, November 6, 2008
Proposition Hate
Let’s talk about lies for a moment. Specifically, let’s talk about liars. When I say liars, I don’t mean people who have told a lie, or even people who lie often. A lie does not a liar make, just as a theft does not create a thief. I don’t even mean people who habitually lie, and have only told the truth maybe once or twice in their entire lives, so long as they do it for entirely selfish reasons. No, a true liar, a filthy, goddamn, piece of shit liar is someone who lies to impose their will on others.
I can understand the people who lie for self-serving purposes, their true motives are clear, but the fucking Liars-with-a-capital-fucking-L, who knows what the hell they’re thinking. The idea that someone can see another person and think, “I need to protect this person from themselves,” simply confounds and repulses me. It’s an entirely new level of self-serving attitude, and it’s evil on a level that even puts most murderers to shame. After all, most murderers act out of passion or for personal gain. But deliberately misleading people to try to bring about your own vision of an ideal world, it’s social manipulation at its most twisted.
This past election day, a ballot measure was passed in the State of California revoking certain rights to a certain group of people. This measure was backed, in secret(note: see Addendum below), almost in total by the Mormon Church. While it’s despicable enough that they hid behind a token list of other names despite being the driving force behind the campaign, the campaign itself also hid behind wall of lies. Ironically, they portrayed their campaign to take away civil liberties as a defense of their own civil liberties. Their case was, of course, entirely made up.
The Mormons spent 80 million dollars to cover the state with lies. And it worked. Of course it worked, because how do you counter such a thing? Who could ever imagine that someone would spend 80 million dollars promoting hate? You simply can’t match that figure to oppose it, because in sane society people don’t go around spending millions of dollars to destroy something that offends them and causes them no harm whatsoever. I’d like to think that people would spend a good deal more than 80 million dollars promoting love, but that’s a far different animal than opposing hate. People just can’t conceive of that amount of hate, because it’s an inconceivable amount. It’s crazy. It’s something only a sociopath would do. It’s Nazi-like in its conception, though admittedly much smaller in scope. But at least Hitler was upfront about what he was doing.
This tears me up inside, not least of all because I was raised by people who to this day continue to count themselves as Mormons. Betrayal is perhaps the wrong word, as I didn’t have any faith in the Mormon church to begin with, but on some level I do feel betrayed. For good or for ill, Mormonism remains a large part of my childhood, and much as I’d like to I can’t just shut it off. That church gave me some wonderful friends, and it did much to help me find my identity, to shape me as a person, even though the shape that took form was in opposition to everything the church stood for. So when it goes out of its way to stomp on the dreams of people I care about, and thousands more, I guess that does in fact read something like betrayal.
Joseph Smith started a religion so he could have sex with teenage girls. That’s bad, but it doesn’t make me hate the religion. He led a bloody coup against the United States, but that doesn’t make me hate the Mormons. Brigham Young ordered THE MASS MURDER OF OVER A HUNDRED UNARMED INNOCENT PEOPLE, yet I still cannot hate him for it, because it was done out of ignorance and fear. But this, this is too much. This is enough for me to finally say, I hate the Mormon church.
I hate the Mormon church. Earlier I mentioned how the majority of murderers are better than this breed of liars, but I left out one class of murderer. The final type of people who kill are those that think that their victims would be much better off dead. And that’s what it boils down to, that the logic of these people who are out to save the world from itself is the logic of a psychopath. And there’s really no defense against that. In the same way that a serial killer can terrorize a city for years without being caught, organizations like the Mormon church can continue to pour money into deceptive campaigns for whatever stupid, crazy act of intolerance takes their fancy. Because there is no motive, no good reason for them to be doing what they are doing. You cannot outmaneuver them because they are not maneuvering. It’s a mental illness, and there is no logical way to counter it.
Usually, I like to end these with an idea to change something, to bring about some glimmer of hope. But I honestly see no solution here. You can’t win an argument with a crazy person, you can only hope that eventually everyone else will see that your opponent is crazy. And since everyone is so worried about trampling on anyone else’s feelings, it could be a long time before people start to see that. So instead of trying to find the good in this situation, because damned if I can see any, I’m just going to say one final thing to make myself feel better.
Fuck you, Mormon church.
ADDENDUM: Since writing this, someone has made the point to me that their stupid fucking church wasn't acting in secret. I disagree. The Mormon church never issued any sort of public statement backing the proposition, and the despite encouraging their members to dig deep for donations, not a single cent was donated by the leaders at the top. They obviously didn't want their role to be known because the church would be flooded with bad press, like it is right now. Just because they failed completely and utterly at covering it up does not mean that they didn't intend to keep their influence in the matter a secret.
I can understand the people who lie for self-serving purposes, their true motives are clear, but the fucking Liars-with-a-capital-fucking-L, who knows what the hell they’re thinking. The idea that someone can see another person and think, “I need to protect this person from themselves,” simply confounds and repulses me. It’s an entirely new level of self-serving attitude, and it’s evil on a level that even puts most murderers to shame. After all, most murderers act out of passion or for personal gain. But deliberately misleading people to try to bring about your own vision of an ideal world, it’s social manipulation at its most twisted.
This past election day, a ballot measure was passed in the State of California revoking certain rights to a certain group of people. This measure was backed, in secret(note: see Addendum below), almost in total by the Mormon Church. While it’s despicable enough that they hid behind a token list of other names despite being the driving force behind the campaign, the campaign itself also hid behind wall of lies. Ironically, they portrayed their campaign to take away civil liberties as a defense of their own civil liberties. Their case was, of course, entirely made up.
The Mormons spent 80 million dollars to cover the state with lies. And it worked. Of course it worked, because how do you counter such a thing? Who could ever imagine that someone would spend 80 million dollars promoting hate? You simply can’t match that figure to oppose it, because in sane society people don’t go around spending millions of dollars to destroy something that offends them and causes them no harm whatsoever. I’d like to think that people would spend a good deal more than 80 million dollars promoting love, but that’s a far different animal than opposing hate. People just can’t conceive of that amount of hate, because it’s an inconceivable amount. It’s crazy. It’s something only a sociopath would do. It’s Nazi-like in its conception, though admittedly much smaller in scope. But at least Hitler was upfront about what he was doing.
This tears me up inside, not least of all because I was raised by people who to this day continue to count themselves as Mormons. Betrayal is perhaps the wrong word, as I didn’t have any faith in the Mormon church to begin with, but on some level I do feel betrayed. For good or for ill, Mormonism remains a large part of my childhood, and much as I’d like to I can’t just shut it off. That church gave me some wonderful friends, and it did much to help me find my identity, to shape me as a person, even though the shape that took form was in opposition to everything the church stood for. So when it goes out of its way to stomp on the dreams of people I care about, and thousands more, I guess that does in fact read something like betrayal.
Joseph Smith started a religion so he could have sex with teenage girls. That’s bad, but it doesn’t make me hate the religion. He led a bloody coup against the United States, but that doesn’t make me hate the Mormons. Brigham Young ordered THE MASS MURDER OF OVER A HUNDRED UNARMED INNOCENT PEOPLE, yet I still cannot hate him for it, because it was done out of ignorance and fear. But this, this is too much. This is enough for me to finally say, I hate the Mormon church.
I hate the Mormon church. Earlier I mentioned how the majority of murderers are better than this breed of liars, but I left out one class of murderer. The final type of people who kill are those that think that their victims would be much better off dead. And that’s what it boils down to, that the logic of these people who are out to save the world from itself is the logic of a psychopath. And there’s really no defense against that. In the same way that a serial killer can terrorize a city for years without being caught, organizations like the Mormon church can continue to pour money into deceptive campaigns for whatever stupid, crazy act of intolerance takes their fancy. Because there is no motive, no good reason for them to be doing what they are doing. You cannot outmaneuver them because they are not maneuvering. It’s a mental illness, and there is no logical way to counter it.
Usually, I like to end these with an idea to change something, to bring about some glimmer of hope. But I honestly see no solution here. You can’t win an argument with a crazy person, you can only hope that eventually everyone else will see that your opponent is crazy. And since everyone is so worried about trampling on anyone else’s feelings, it could be a long time before people start to see that. So instead of trying to find the good in this situation, because damned if I can see any, I’m just going to say one final thing to make myself feel better.
Fuck you, Mormon church.
ADDENDUM: Since writing this, someone has made the point to me that their stupid fucking church wasn't acting in secret. I disagree. The Mormon church never issued any sort of public statement backing the proposition, and the despite encouraging their members to dig deep for donations, not a single cent was donated by the leaders at the top. They obviously didn't want their role to be known because the church would be flooded with bad press, like it is right now. Just because they failed completely and utterly at covering it up does not mean that they didn't intend to keep their influence in the matter a secret.
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Anarchy For Dummies: Weighing In on Gun Control
I do not own a firearm, nor do I have any plans to ever purchase one. I do not trust myself to operate a firearm safely, so I just don’t want to have one around. I don’t see the point of hunting, and I don’t shoot recreationally. I like John Woo movies, but that’s pretty much the extent of my personal appreciation of guns. Given this, I don’t think I could possibly be labeled as a gun enthusiast, or whatever euphemism or pejorative your personal preference would dictate. I mention this because I have a rather strong, perhaps even unique, stance on gun control, and I don’t want to be dismissed out of hand. My stance is this: there should be no gun control whatsoever.
Pro-gun lobbyists have their points about defense and protection, and the anti-gun lobby has its points about safety and crime. These arguments don’t really intersect in any meaningful way, so this line of inquiry is mostly moot, becoming little more than an overblown shouting match. Like most people, I think one side has a better argument in this regard, but my opinion isn’t really important. Facts are important. Watching people argue their opinions on gun control is a lot like watching a debate between Coke and Pepsi; it’s a matter of personal preference, and not likely to be resolved in this way.
Perhaps realizing this, both sides scramble to find an authority to support their claim. And when discussing possible legislature in this country, there is no higher authority than the Constitution. Thus arises the battle over which side is supported by the Second Amendment to the US Constitution.
Before going any further, let’s take a look at the text of this troublesome clause. The Second Amendment, in its entirety, reads, “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” The point of contention here is that some people feel that “shall not be infringed” can be interpreted to mean, “can be infringed if you feel like it.” Some people think that it only applies to the military, despite the fact that it protects “the right of the People to keep and bear arms.”
Now, maybe you think I’m not being fair. Maybe you think there’s some subtle nuance I’m missing in the wording, or that something is lost in the translation due to antiquated language. I’ll be the first to admit that the Constitution is not perfect. That’s not just a figure of speech, I mean that you’d actually be hard pressed to find someone who thinks the Constitution isn’t perfect. Despite this, no document is going to be completely relevant to its people 200 years later. In this case, however, it may be more relevant than ever.
Maybe the reason there is so much quibbling over the wording is the fact that it seems to equate the militia and the people. One side or the other of this debate feels the need to emphasize one aspect, either militia or people, over the other. To attain a deeper understanding of the meaning of the, one must evaluate the cultural context. Militia and people are equated in the document because in the 18th century, they were the same thing. One notion that is mistakenly made is that their usage of the word militia means the same thing as “military.” This could not be farther from the truth. When the Constitution was in the process of being ratified, there was great concern over the power of the federal government going unchecked, which is why the Bill of Rights was drafted. Representatives were nervous about the possibility of a large national army gaining too much power, so they insisted that the citizens be permitted to fight back should the occasion arise. The dangers of excessive force were still fresh in their minds.
Historically, the most fascist governments are the ones that earned their power on the good will and confidence of their people. The banner of freedom can easily be made to prop open the door to tyranny. Our country was never meant to meddle outside its own affairs. We were never intended to be a major player on the world stage. Our current policy of expansionism requires a large military force, a force which has no problem placing a towel over someone’s face and forcing water down their throat. How long can such a force maintain our best interests? It is not unreasonable to think that in 50 or 100 years that power could be turned inward to suppress its own people. This is the real reason the framers of the constitution sought to arm the people of their country, to protect citizens from their own government.
It has been pointed out that countries that have strict gun control have not slid into fascism, but none of these countries have the most powerful military in the entire world. Australia, Canada, Spain, Germany, these are not the countries you think of when you hear the phrase “military might.”
The idea of overthrowing the US government is certainly not a popular one, and I’m not suggesting it. The first amendment is still alive and kicking in this country, though privacy has certainly taken a hit. And while I hope that our freedoms continue to be protected, we shouldn’t just assume they will. Obviously the decision to enact violence is not one to be taken lightly. We should take our cues from the early days of our country, which suffered years of abuse and pursued every possible peaceful resolution before finally taking up arms. However, if the government fails us, and we have no options left but to organize a militia, I’d like for them to be armed with something better than single shot hunting rifles.
Thomas Jefferson once wrote, “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.” This quote has been taken out of context and used to justify just about every war our country has entered since these words were published after his death. What Jefferson actually wrote those words in regards to was Daniel Shays’ rebellion in Massachusetts. He felt that the revolutionaries had been misinformed, however he applauded their resolve. Their passion served as a warning to the government that its people were not complacent, and would not allow themselves to be suppressed. A progressive government is one that fears its people.
I’m not a frightening person, and I don’t know any one person that the government would be afraid of. But if the power structure ever grows too big and threatens to trample us, we will stand united against it. And if that fails, we’ll stand united with some really big guns.
Pro-gun lobbyists have their points about defense and protection, and the anti-gun lobby has its points about safety and crime. These arguments don’t really intersect in any meaningful way, so this line of inquiry is mostly moot, becoming little more than an overblown shouting match. Like most people, I think one side has a better argument in this regard, but my opinion isn’t really important. Facts are important. Watching people argue their opinions on gun control is a lot like watching a debate between Coke and Pepsi; it’s a matter of personal preference, and not likely to be resolved in this way.
Perhaps realizing this, both sides scramble to find an authority to support their claim. And when discussing possible legislature in this country, there is no higher authority than the Constitution. Thus arises the battle over which side is supported by the Second Amendment to the US Constitution.
Before going any further, let’s take a look at the text of this troublesome clause. The Second Amendment, in its entirety, reads, “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” The point of contention here is that some people feel that “shall not be infringed” can be interpreted to mean, “can be infringed if you feel like it.” Some people think that it only applies to the military, despite the fact that it protects “the right of the People to keep and bear arms.”
Now, maybe you think I’m not being fair. Maybe you think there’s some subtle nuance I’m missing in the wording, or that something is lost in the translation due to antiquated language. I’ll be the first to admit that the Constitution is not perfect. That’s not just a figure of speech, I mean that you’d actually be hard pressed to find someone who thinks the Constitution isn’t perfect. Despite this, no document is going to be completely relevant to its people 200 years later. In this case, however, it may be more relevant than ever.
Maybe the reason there is so much quibbling over the wording is the fact that it seems to equate the militia and the people. One side or the other of this debate feels the need to emphasize one aspect, either militia or people, over the other. To attain a deeper understanding of the meaning of the, one must evaluate the cultural context. Militia and people are equated in the document because in the 18th century, they were the same thing. One notion that is mistakenly made is that their usage of the word militia means the same thing as “military.” This could not be farther from the truth. When the Constitution was in the process of being ratified, there was great concern over the power of the federal government going unchecked, which is why the Bill of Rights was drafted. Representatives were nervous about the possibility of a large national army gaining too much power, so they insisted that the citizens be permitted to fight back should the occasion arise. The dangers of excessive force were still fresh in their minds.
Historically, the most fascist governments are the ones that earned their power on the good will and confidence of their people. The banner of freedom can easily be made to prop open the door to tyranny. Our country was never meant to meddle outside its own affairs. We were never intended to be a major player on the world stage. Our current policy of expansionism requires a large military force, a force which has no problem placing a towel over someone’s face and forcing water down their throat. How long can such a force maintain our best interests? It is not unreasonable to think that in 50 or 100 years that power could be turned inward to suppress its own people. This is the real reason the framers of the constitution sought to arm the people of their country, to protect citizens from their own government.
It has been pointed out that countries that have strict gun control have not slid into fascism, but none of these countries have the most powerful military in the entire world. Australia, Canada, Spain, Germany, these are not the countries you think of when you hear the phrase “military might.”
The idea of overthrowing the US government is certainly not a popular one, and I’m not suggesting it. The first amendment is still alive and kicking in this country, though privacy has certainly taken a hit. And while I hope that our freedoms continue to be protected, we shouldn’t just assume they will. Obviously the decision to enact violence is not one to be taken lightly. We should take our cues from the early days of our country, which suffered years of abuse and pursued every possible peaceful resolution before finally taking up arms. However, if the government fails us, and we have no options left but to organize a militia, I’d like for them to be armed with something better than single shot hunting rifles.
Thomas Jefferson once wrote, “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.” This quote has been taken out of context and used to justify just about every war our country has entered since these words were published after his death. What Jefferson actually wrote those words in regards to was Daniel Shays’ rebellion in Massachusetts. He felt that the revolutionaries had been misinformed, however he applauded their resolve. Their passion served as a warning to the government that its people were not complacent, and would not allow themselves to be suppressed. A progressive government is one that fears its people.
I’m not a frightening person, and I don’t know any one person that the government would be afraid of. But if the power structure ever grows too big and threatens to trample us, we will stand united against it. And if that fails, we’ll stand united with some really big guns.
Saturday, September 22, 2007
A Mini-Play Not About Al Gore
NATHANIEL
Say Brian, have you heard the latest news?
BRIAN
I am unsure as to which news you are referring.
NATHANIEL
It seems that 99% of all homicides are, in fact, committed by rabbits. They’ve got to be stopped, Brian, we’ve got to bring an end to the killing.
BRIAN
That seems like a dubious claim, Nathaniel.
NATHANIEL
Ah, but I’m afraid it is true. Why there could be rabbits in your house RIGHT NOW, killing your children.
BRIAN
Perchance do you have any evidence to back up this claim?
NATHANIEL
Of course I do. Do you honestly think I’d say something like that without evidence?
BRIAN
…
NATHANIEL
…
BRIAN
Well?
NATHANIEL
Fine, since you’re so insistent. It was in a recent scientific paper.
BRIAN
By whom?
NATHANIEL
A well respected scientist.
BRIAN
Which one?
NATHANIEL
Look, I can’t be expected to keep track of everything and cite every little thing I say. I’m not Superman.
BRIAN
Well, you do seem to be trying to save the world from deadly bunny rabbits.
NATHANIEL
Oh, so it’s like that, is it? This whole thing is just a joke to you?
BRIAN
Owing to the nature of your claim, it is somewhat amusing.
NATHANIEL
Well, if you’re so clever and bright, why don’t you back it up? Prove that I’m wrong.
BRIAN
Are you serious?
NATHANIEL
I certainly am, Brian. If you can’t just admit that you are wrong, then come up with something to prove your claim.
BRIAN
You mean my claim that the overwhelming majority of homicide cases aren’t perpetrated by rabbits? Shouldn’t you be the one to prove your case, since yours is more extraordinary, and appears to be transparently made up on the spot?
NATHANIEL
Ah, but I’ve already proven my claim, haven’t I?
BRIAN
No.
NATHANIEL
I knew it, you can’t disprove my point, and you’re simply attacking me because you can’t admit defeat.
BRIAN
This is growing tiresome. Why don’t we just solve this debate by going down to the police station and asking to see their statistics?
NATHANIEL
Oh please, you honestly trust their statistics?
BRIAN
Well, yes. Why wouldn’t I?
NATHANIEL
Well, there are a number of homicides that go unreported, or unsolved. Also the police don’t process rabbits, only humans.
BRIAN
What percentage of homicides go unsolved?
NATHANIEL
Oh, I would say… about 99%.
BRIAN
Even if that were true, which it is not, then how do you conclude that the murderers are all rabbits?
NATHANIEL
Look Brian, no accurate rabbit census has ever been taken, and we already know these things procreate like, well, like bunnies. If we’re not careful, we could soon be up to our eyeballs in duplicitous, murdering long ears.
BRIAN
You just completely changed the subject, and now you’ve moved on to meaningless fear mongering.
NATHANIEL
According to my calculations, in ten years, the rabbit density in New Mexico will increase to 13 rabbits for every square foot. Imagine a giant fuzzy blanket of cottony tails, whiskers, and HORROR.
BRIAN
Are you even listening to me anymore?
NATHANIEL
I’ve prepared a PowerPoint presentation, and I’m going to use it to spread awareness of this issue around the entire world.
BRIAN
Yeah, guess not.
NATHANIEL
Then, hopefully with a little luck, I’ll win an Oscar for it somehow, and I’ll be able to have people who disagree with me kil--
BRIAN
Well, good luck with your mental breakdown there, I’m going to go get some lunch.
NATHANIEL
And then no one will ever be able to call me “Mr. Poopypants” again! For I will be a respected humanitarian! BWAHAHAHAHA!
Epilogue: Two minutes later, Nathaniel blew out his O-ring and his trousers sadly perished of an extreme case of butt poisoning.
ADDENDUM
Say Brian, have you heard the latest news?
BRIAN
I am unsure as to which news you are referring.
NATHANIEL
It seems that 99% of all homicides are, in fact, committed by rabbits. They’ve got to be stopped, Brian, we’ve got to bring an end to the killing.
BRIAN
That seems like a dubious claim, Nathaniel.
NATHANIEL
Ah, but I’m afraid it is true. Why there could be rabbits in your house RIGHT NOW, killing your children.
BRIAN
Perchance do you have any evidence to back up this claim?
NATHANIEL
Of course I do. Do you honestly think I’d say something like that without evidence?
BRIAN
…
NATHANIEL
…
BRIAN
Well?
NATHANIEL
Fine, since you’re so insistent. It was in a recent scientific paper.
BRIAN
By whom?
NATHANIEL
A well respected scientist.
BRIAN
Which one?
NATHANIEL
Look, I can’t be expected to keep track of everything and cite every little thing I say. I’m not Superman.
BRIAN
Well, you do seem to be trying to save the world from deadly bunny rabbits.
NATHANIEL
Oh, so it’s like that, is it? This whole thing is just a joke to you?
BRIAN
Owing to the nature of your claim, it is somewhat amusing.
NATHANIEL
Well, if you’re so clever and bright, why don’t you back it up? Prove that I’m wrong.
BRIAN
Are you serious?
NATHANIEL
I certainly am, Brian. If you can’t just admit that you are wrong, then come up with something to prove your claim.
BRIAN
You mean my claim that the overwhelming majority of homicide cases aren’t perpetrated by rabbits? Shouldn’t you be the one to prove your case, since yours is more extraordinary, and appears to be transparently made up on the spot?
NATHANIEL
Ah, but I’ve already proven my claim, haven’t I?
BRIAN
No.
NATHANIEL
I knew it, you can’t disprove my point, and you’re simply attacking me because you can’t admit defeat.
BRIAN
This is growing tiresome. Why don’t we just solve this debate by going down to the police station and asking to see their statistics?
NATHANIEL
Oh please, you honestly trust their statistics?
BRIAN
Well, yes. Why wouldn’t I?
NATHANIEL
Well, there are a number of homicides that go unreported, or unsolved. Also the police don’t process rabbits, only humans.
BRIAN
What percentage of homicides go unsolved?
NATHANIEL
Oh, I would say… about 99%.
BRIAN
Even if that were true, which it is not, then how do you conclude that the murderers are all rabbits?
NATHANIEL
Look Brian, no accurate rabbit census has ever been taken, and we already know these things procreate like, well, like bunnies. If we’re not careful, we could soon be up to our eyeballs in duplicitous, murdering long ears.
BRIAN
You just completely changed the subject, and now you’ve moved on to meaningless fear mongering.
NATHANIEL
According to my calculations, in ten years, the rabbit density in New Mexico will increase to 13 rabbits for every square foot. Imagine a giant fuzzy blanket of cottony tails, whiskers, and HORROR.
BRIAN
Are you even listening to me anymore?
NATHANIEL
I’ve prepared a PowerPoint presentation, and I’m going to use it to spread awareness of this issue around the entire world.
BRIAN
Yeah, guess not.
NATHANIEL
Then, hopefully with a little luck, I’ll win an Oscar for it somehow, and I’ll be able to have people who disagree with me kil--
BRIAN
Well, good luck with your mental breakdown there, I’m going to go get some lunch.
NATHANIEL
And then no one will ever be able to call me “Mr. Poopypants” again! For I will be a respected humanitarian! BWAHAHAHAHA!
Epilogue: Two minutes later, Nathaniel blew out his O-ring and his trousers sadly perished of an extreme case of butt poisoning.
ADDENDUM
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
A Broken Mind Part 2: Playing Dress-Up
As should be readily apparent, I am a great admirer of science. I think the scientific method is THE crowning achievement of mankind (sorry to disappoint you, figure skating, but you’re just kind of lame). But I also think science is one of the most misunderstood concepts in today’s society. To most people, the word conjures up some sort of image of people standing around in lab coats, fiddling with test tubes, and figuring out how much an atom of beryllium weighs, and other information which couldn’t possibly be of interest to them. Others see it as something not unlike voodoo, all the while standing around cursing the bureaucratic bean counters for holding back production of their flying automobiles.
It is this second group which the charlatans feed off. People who wouldn’t know true science if it punched them in the face and shat on their tuna fish sandwich. These people are fair game for psychics, chiropractors, mediums, new age anythings, messiahs, alien abductees, missionaries, ghost hunters, gypsies, tramps, and thieves. These people, who hold up science as some sort of treat, enticing the hoodwinkable with hard to understand concepts like energy, and dazzling them with big ten dollar words (adjusted for inflation), are just making speed bumps on the road of our cultural evolution by confusing people with fake science.
Now, I’m not faulting them for being opportunistic. I see nothing wrong with attempting to make a quick buck. I’m just saying that if you have to lie to sell your product or service, you shouldn’t be selling it in the first place. Anything you have to offer society must stand on its own or not at all. You can’t pack your excrement into bars and then tell me it’s chocolate, that’s immoral. If you want to sell it with a big ol’ sign that says, “Feces for Sale, RIGHT HERE!” I’m okay with that. It’s when someone not only resorts to dishonesty, but also drags the good name of science through the mud that makes me want to pull out my switchblade, snap my fingers, and get ready to rumble.
Claiming to play in the realm of science when you obviously don’t is a serious offense. It’s like printing a fake review on the back of your book, and attributing it to a real critic. It’s utterly dishonest, and you just shouldn’t be able to get away with it. Science is very clearly defined, it’s never vague, and you can’t make statements without supporting them. Science is also peer reviewed, so on the off chance someone’s judgment is clouded on a particular issue, it can be caught and corrected. Those are some big shoes to fill, and that’s the reason I’m not a scientist, merely a cheerleader for science. The amount of responsibility required to enter that arena is substantial, unlike the claims of the aforementioned charlatans.
Okay, fine, not all of them are charlatans. Some actually do believe in the shit they’re selling. But that’s only because somebody else sold it to them first, and that’s part of the problem. You’ve got otherwise trustworthy people spreading disinformation simply because someone gave them a good price on a fake bridge. Since not everybody peddling this shit is a fraud, it becomes harder and harder to figure out what’s true and what isn’t. And that’s exactly what the dishonest people want.
They want fact and fiction to mingle together into an inseparable mess. This legitimizes them, which is an attractive quality for the consumer. In no uncertain terms, they seek to destroy science in order to make money. Not only does this mean they’re stepping on the customers, and the people they con into propagating their spurious claims, by weakening the position of science they are diminishing the quality of your life, the lives of your family, the lives of your friends, the lives of your neighbors, of your countrymen, of the entire population of the world and every generation yet to come. They are fucking over billions of people, and for what? To make a few bucks? That is utterly repulsive.
There will always be repulsive people in the world, people who will have more power than they should. There will always exist people who will lie and swindle, and get away with it; but these people don’t have to get away with it. It is so incredibly easy to catch them in their lie, yet they maintain power because most people don’t even try. They always come up with excuses, like “I can’t make this distinction, I’m not an expert!” or “science is too complicated for me to understand.” These are, of course, untrue. I mean, it’s not like you have to do the research yourself, there are plenty of other people willing to do that for you. All you have to do is recognize the signs of true science, which is why I’ve taken the time to create the following list to help you out. If the claim you’re examining is missing any of these elements, chances are you’re holding a big old vial of snake oil:
Observation
This is pretty basic, if there’s something you want to understand, you first have to observe some kind of result that doesn’t have an adequate explanation. If your claim is based on a theory instead of an observation, you’ve probably been flim-flammed. For example, holistic medicine is based on some kind of theory about vibrating particles, which is currently untestable and thus, unobservable. Where the supposed good effects come into play, I have never seen.
Prediction
This is perhaps the most misunderstood part of the scientific method, because what it isn’t is a wild guess about what is going on. This stage involves taking what we do know about the world around us and combining it with what we think we know, in order to form a way to move the latter category into the former. The way the fakers usually twist this one is to move things between the two categories before they’ve been proven, they make the effect into the cause and the cause into the effect. Unless a hypothesis is founded upon hard fact, it’s just a guess.
Control
This is the big one. It’s where most psuedosciences fuck it up, because this is a difficult one to fake. This is a group of experimental subjects who are exposed to all the same conditions as the others, except for the one you’re testing for. It doesn’t weed out all inaccuracy, as some conditions can be difficult to separate, but it’s considered a requirement because it eliminates a huge group of possible alternative explanations in one fell swoop. If the only results you see are from people who received the so-called treatment, then I absolutely guarantee it’s a con job.
Falsifiability
If something can be proven to be true, it follows that there should also be a test that can prove it false. Now, if the scientist left out one or two possible explanations, then it’s possible you’re simply dealing with a lazy scientist. But if other possibilities never even come up, then that person is trying to take your money. Because when you’re scamming people, you don’t ever want the possibility of you being wrong to ever come up, because doubt hurts the bottom line. In the pursuit of truth though, assumptions have to be questioned every step of the way.
Experimentation
That’s right, once you’ve worked out a theory, and where the weak points in it are, you’ve got to test the damn thing. And testing means data, completely quantifiable and measurable. The tricky thing about data though, is since it doesn’t exist in the physical world, it’s so easy to fake. Bad data can be hard to spot, but a good rule of thumb is if it’s too good to be true, it’s probably not true. If your study does have data though, and it fails on any of these other counts, then at least you know they just pulled it out of their ass, and now you know the magnitude of the malfeasance being performed on you.
Repeatability
Repetition builds a theories strength, especially when performed by others. In order to allow others to reproduce your experiment though, you have to very clearly outline your method. If something about the method seems unclear or slightly off somehow, chances are they’re covering their tracks, because they don’t want people to verify their lies.
Explanation
Time to wrap it up, and for the real scientist, this is where you have to go all in. You have to form a conclusion, but not just any conclusion. Your conclusion has to be supported by every single one of the steps outlined above. If you come up short in any single area, everything you’ve just attempted is all for nothing. As you can see, this is no small task, and this is the reason I could never be a scientist. You could devote years of your life to something only to find out one day that everything you’ve accomplished has been refuted because of some tiny concept that you failed to observe. And if you go into that field, this IS going to happen to you, and probably more than once. Is it cruel? Without a doubt. But it is also the fastest and most reliable way of attaining accurate knowledge. And if you claim to be a scientist but don’t allow yourself to be exposed to that, then you’re just a kid stuffing your little feet into a parent’s enormous shoes. Science is about bravery, valor, and humility. And to undermine it is to undermine all those things.
I beg all who would listen, to stop letting people get away with this kind of cockery. Use this guide, and learn to tell real science from the money-grubbing schemers. Because if you’re not a part of the solution, you’re a part of the precipitate.
It is this second group which the charlatans feed off. People who wouldn’t know true science if it punched them in the face and shat on their tuna fish sandwich. These people are fair game for psychics, chiropractors, mediums, new age anythings, messiahs, alien abductees, missionaries, ghost hunters, gypsies, tramps, and thieves. These people, who hold up science as some sort of treat, enticing the hoodwinkable with hard to understand concepts like energy, and dazzling them with big ten dollar words (adjusted for inflation), are just making speed bumps on the road of our cultural evolution by confusing people with fake science.
Now, I’m not faulting them for being opportunistic. I see nothing wrong with attempting to make a quick buck. I’m just saying that if you have to lie to sell your product or service, you shouldn’t be selling it in the first place. Anything you have to offer society must stand on its own or not at all. You can’t pack your excrement into bars and then tell me it’s chocolate, that’s immoral. If you want to sell it with a big ol’ sign that says, “Feces for Sale, RIGHT HERE!” I’m okay with that. It’s when someone not only resorts to dishonesty, but also drags the good name of science through the mud that makes me want to pull out my switchblade, snap my fingers, and get ready to rumble.
Claiming to play in the realm of science when you obviously don’t is a serious offense. It’s like printing a fake review on the back of your book, and attributing it to a real critic. It’s utterly dishonest, and you just shouldn’t be able to get away with it. Science is very clearly defined, it’s never vague, and you can’t make statements without supporting them. Science is also peer reviewed, so on the off chance someone’s judgment is clouded on a particular issue, it can be caught and corrected. Those are some big shoes to fill, and that’s the reason I’m not a scientist, merely a cheerleader for science. The amount of responsibility required to enter that arena is substantial, unlike the claims of the aforementioned charlatans.
Okay, fine, not all of them are charlatans. Some actually do believe in the shit they’re selling. But that’s only because somebody else sold it to them first, and that’s part of the problem. You’ve got otherwise trustworthy people spreading disinformation simply because someone gave them a good price on a fake bridge. Since not everybody peddling this shit is a fraud, it becomes harder and harder to figure out what’s true and what isn’t. And that’s exactly what the dishonest people want.
They want fact and fiction to mingle together into an inseparable mess. This legitimizes them, which is an attractive quality for the consumer. In no uncertain terms, they seek to destroy science in order to make money. Not only does this mean they’re stepping on the customers, and the people they con into propagating their spurious claims, by weakening the position of science they are diminishing the quality of your life, the lives of your family, the lives of your friends, the lives of your neighbors, of your countrymen, of the entire population of the world and every generation yet to come. They are fucking over billions of people, and for what? To make a few bucks? That is utterly repulsive.
There will always be repulsive people in the world, people who will have more power than they should. There will always exist people who will lie and swindle, and get away with it; but these people don’t have to get away with it. It is so incredibly easy to catch them in their lie, yet they maintain power because most people don’t even try. They always come up with excuses, like “I can’t make this distinction, I’m not an expert!” or “science is too complicated for me to understand.” These are, of course, untrue. I mean, it’s not like you have to do the research yourself, there are plenty of other people willing to do that for you. All you have to do is recognize the signs of true science, which is why I’ve taken the time to create the following list to help you out. If the claim you’re examining is missing any of these elements, chances are you’re holding a big old vial of snake oil:
Observation
This is pretty basic, if there’s something you want to understand, you first have to observe some kind of result that doesn’t have an adequate explanation. If your claim is based on a theory instead of an observation, you’ve probably been flim-flammed. For example, holistic medicine is based on some kind of theory about vibrating particles, which is currently untestable and thus, unobservable. Where the supposed good effects come into play, I have never seen.
Prediction
This is perhaps the most misunderstood part of the scientific method, because what it isn’t is a wild guess about what is going on. This stage involves taking what we do know about the world around us and combining it with what we think we know, in order to form a way to move the latter category into the former. The way the fakers usually twist this one is to move things between the two categories before they’ve been proven, they make the effect into the cause and the cause into the effect. Unless a hypothesis is founded upon hard fact, it’s just a guess.
Control
This is the big one. It’s where most psuedosciences fuck it up, because this is a difficult one to fake. This is a group of experimental subjects who are exposed to all the same conditions as the others, except for the one you’re testing for. It doesn’t weed out all inaccuracy, as some conditions can be difficult to separate, but it’s considered a requirement because it eliminates a huge group of possible alternative explanations in one fell swoop. If the only results you see are from people who received the so-called treatment, then I absolutely guarantee it’s a con job.
Falsifiability
If something can be proven to be true, it follows that there should also be a test that can prove it false. Now, if the scientist left out one or two possible explanations, then it’s possible you’re simply dealing with a lazy scientist. But if other possibilities never even come up, then that person is trying to take your money. Because when you’re scamming people, you don’t ever want the possibility of you being wrong to ever come up, because doubt hurts the bottom line. In the pursuit of truth though, assumptions have to be questioned every step of the way.
Experimentation
That’s right, once you’ve worked out a theory, and where the weak points in it are, you’ve got to test the damn thing. And testing means data, completely quantifiable and measurable. The tricky thing about data though, is since it doesn’t exist in the physical world, it’s so easy to fake. Bad data can be hard to spot, but a good rule of thumb is if it’s too good to be true, it’s probably not true. If your study does have data though, and it fails on any of these other counts, then at least you know they just pulled it out of their ass, and now you know the magnitude of the malfeasance being performed on you.
Repeatability
Repetition builds a theories strength, especially when performed by others. In order to allow others to reproduce your experiment though, you have to very clearly outline your method. If something about the method seems unclear or slightly off somehow, chances are they’re covering their tracks, because they don’t want people to verify their lies.
Explanation
Time to wrap it up, and for the real scientist, this is where you have to go all in. You have to form a conclusion, but not just any conclusion. Your conclusion has to be supported by every single one of the steps outlined above. If you come up short in any single area, everything you’ve just attempted is all for nothing. As you can see, this is no small task, and this is the reason I could never be a scientist. You could devote years of your life to something only to find out one day that everything you’ve accomplished has been refuted because of some tiny concept that you failed to observe. And if you go into that field, this IS going to happen to you, and probably more than once. Is it cruel? Without a doubt. But it is also the fastest and most reliable way of attaining accurate knowledge. And if you claim to be a scientist but don’t allow yourself to be exposed to that, then you’re just a kid stuffing your little feet into a parent’s enormous shoes. Science is about bravery, valor, and humility. And to undermine it is to undermine all those things.
I beg all who would listen, to stop letting people get away with this kind of cockery. Use this guide, and learn to tell real science from the money-grubbing schemers. Because if you’re not a part of the solution, you’re a part of the precipitate.
Tuesday, May 8, 2007
Fucking Fuck Apple, and Their Shoddy Ass Products
I'm going to start off this post with a confession. I'm a big fucking hypocrite. I wrote this huge review completely blasting Apple Computers, particularly their marketing, and a few weeks ago, I bought an Ipod (no, I shall not lowercase that "I" because I won't give them the satisfaction). I bought it because I wanted a portable video playing device, and theirs was the cheapest one with all the features I wanted. I also bought it because I now subscribe to a number of podcasts, and I wanted a device with better organization for those. Which brings me to my complaint.
I fucking hate Itunes (again, note the "I"). And with good reason, because it sucks at organizing my music, and it likes to fuck around with my painstakingly organized tag information. But now that I have a fucking Ipod, I need to use fucking Itunes to transfer my stuff to it. Which is bad enough, but as I'm subscribing to all my podcasts over again in Itunes, something interesting is happening. Occasionally, a big group of podcast files decides to just disappear into the ether. Now, longtime Itunes users, I know what you're thinking; you're thinking that I just have it set to delete my old episodes. This is not the case, because I know where to find the settings, I know what they are set on, and I know what happens when you set them that way, and it isn't this. I can tell, because Itunes continues to look for the files, going so far as to ask me if I want to locate them. So I go into the folder, and to my surprise, the file that was there just two hours ago has now vanished without a trace. And no file bearing its name exists anywhere on my computer. And of course there's no way to re-download just that one file, oh no, that would be too convenient. You have to unsubscribe from the podcast, and re-download EVERY SINGLE EPISODE over again. And if you like to keep your old episodes like I do, this is a huge pain in the ass.
So, Apple, if you're reading this (you're probably not, so luckily I sent you an email stating the same thing but saying the word "fuck" a few less times), you're officially on my list of people who I wouldn't mind if they got sodomized by bears (sadly, the bears can only manage to sodomize six people per year, or at least six who will report it). If this is the type of product you put your name behind, and the type of customer service you offer (where the fuck is your damned telephone number?), then I deeply regret giving you money. And keep in mind you were already on my shit list when I did. If I had it to do over again, I would have spent the extra money and gone with a brand that doesn't treat people like shit and act all fucking haughty over it. Your corporation is garbage, and I hope that someday your legacy is regarded as a puke-stain on the carpet in the hall of history.
Also, bears, if you're reading this, I would be eternally grateful if you would place these guys at the top of your anal rape list. Seriously, I'll buy you guys dinner and everything.
ADDENDUM:
I fucking hate Itunes (again, note the "I"). And with good reason, because it sucks at organizing my music, and it likes to fuck around with my painstakingly organized tag information. But now that I have a fucking Ipod, I need to use fucking Itunes to transfer my stuff to it. Which is bad enough, but as I'm subscribing to all my podcasts over again in Itunes, something interesting is happening. Occasionally, a big group of podcast files decides to just disappear into the ether. Now, longtime Itunes users, I know what you're thinking; you're thinking that I just have it set to delete my old episodes. This is not the case, because I know where to find the settings, I know what they are set on, and I know what happens when you set them that way, and it isn't this. I can tell, because Itunes continues to look for the files, going so far as to ask me if I want to locate them. So I go into the folder, and to my surprise, the file that was there just two hours ago has now vanished without a trace. And no file bearing its name exists anywhere on my computer. And of course there's no way to re-download just that one file, oh no, that would be too convenient. You have to unsubscribe from the podcast, and re-download EVERY SINGLE EPISODE over again. And if you like to keep your old episodes like I do, this is a huge pain in the ass.
So, Apple, if you're reading this (you're probably not, so luckily I sent you an email stating the same thing but saying the word "fuck" a few less times), you're officially on my list of people who I wouldn't mind if they got sodomized by bears (sadly, the bears can only manage to sodomize six people per year, or at least six who will report it). If this is the type of product you put your name behind, and the type of customer service you offer (where the fuck is your damned telephone number?), then I deeply regret giving you money. And keep in mind you were already on my shit list when I did. If I had it to do over again, I would have spent the extra money and gone with a brand that doesn't treat people like shit and act all fucking haughty over it. Your corporation is garbage, and I hope that someday your legacy is regarded as a puke-stain on the carpet in the hall of history.
Also, bears, if you're reading this, I would be eternally grateful if you would place these guys at the top of your anal rape list. Seriously, I'll buy you guys dinner and everything.
ADDENDUM:
Thursday, April 5, 2007
Start at the End
Have you ever done anything you later came to regret? Have you ever hurt someone, intentionally or unintentionally, only to realize your wrongdoing too late, and now that person remains lost to you forever? Have you ever felt like you were caught in a dark dense fog, and in your confusion and fear you lashed out, thrashing, biting, and screaming, only to have the fog lift to discover your perceived attackers were really your friends all along?
Today I am taking the first steps to put the darkness behind me, but in doing so, I realize I can never truly be free of it. The time to make amends came, and went while I was still enshrouded. The memories are painful, having to watch yourself make your worst decisions over and over. At times like these, I can understand why the concept of sin came to be. This deep feeling of regret, which never seems to disappear, can begin to feel like a stain on the soul.
So what happens? A con artist shows up to try to sell you salve for your soul. Absolution at reasonable rates. After all, we're all sinners, every single one of us, and we all could stand to lighten our burdens. But that miracle analgesic is really just cold cream, and we're being ripped off. Believe me, I know, because I've pushed the cold cream, in fact that's one of my regrets. And it's designed that way. They have you lie to people, that way if you ever want to leave, you have to embrace the darkness and face the pain of one of the worst decisions of your life. You find yourself trapped by an ever-expanding wall of pain and misery, and few people have the courage to climb it.
This step I am now taking, I have been putting it off for fear that it would strain some of my relationships, but I see now that I have in fact put it off too long. By holding on to my association, even if it is simply a matter of record, I am continuing to lend support to my regrets. Well, not anymore, I am ending my part in this cycle of lies. True, this in no way absolves me, but I've no longer come to expect absolution. That promise is a lie, and the refuge of a coward. All we can do is deliver our best effort, and hope that it eventually gets better.
Salvation lies not in a great chapel of brick and mortar, but in a simple act of honesty and compassion.
Today I am taking the first steps to put the darkness behind me, but in doing so, I realize I can never truly be free of it. The time to make amends came, and went while I was still enshrouded. The memories are painful, having to watch yourself make your worst decisions over and over. At times like these, I can understand why the concept of sin came to be. This deep feeling of regret, which never seems to disappear, can begin to feel like a stain on the soul.
So what happens? A con artist shows up to try to sell you salve for your soul. Absolution at reasonable rates. After all, we're all sinners, every single one of us, and we all could stand to lighten our burdens. But that miracle analgesic is really just cold cream, and we're being ripped off. Believe me, I know, because I've pushed the cold cream, in fact that's one of my regrets. And it's designed that way. They have you lie to people, that way if you ever want to leave, you have to embrace the darkness and face the pain of one of the worst decisions of your life. You find yourself trapped by an ever-expanding wall of pain and misery, and few people have the courage to climb it.
This step I am now taking, I have been putting it off for fear that it would strain some of my relationships, but I see now that I have in fact put it off too long. By holding on to my association, even if it is simply a matter of record, I am continuing to lend support to my regrets. Well, not anymore, I am ending my part in this cycle of lies. True, this in no way absolves me, but I've no longer come to expect absolution. That promise is a lie, and the refuge of a coward. All we can do is deliver our best effort, and hope that it eventually gets better.
Salvation lies not in a great chapel of brick and mortar, but in a simple act of honesty and compassion.
Monday, March 5, 2007
Mac vs PC Round 2
In the last round, Mac won just 1 point out of a possible 12. Now, as we have 11 more commercials to get through, and since nobody reads introductions anyway, fart testicles onomatopoeia, let's watch some movies while I make sarcastic remarks!
Self-Pity
Hey look, he's wearing a suit! It's okay, you can start taking us seriously again because our guy is wearing a suit! He's still rocking the chin pubes, but now he's responsible and shit. On an unrelated note, this much-touted Microsoft Office costs $350. Open Office costs 350 less dollars than that, and is multiplatform to boot.
Better Results
Looks like iMovie takes this contest. By the way, the word professional has been changed to mean "timeline of crap you shot with your friends with no real way sense of flow or timing." Just try to limit the cheesy pseudo-3d transition effects to like, 4 or 5 times per minute, guys. It's called restraint.
Counselor
This one marks a turning point for the series. At this point, the ads had been running for a while, and it seems people were identifying more with the PC Guy (which, can you blame them, being played by the infinitely huggable John Hodgman), so they started making his character into an asshole for no apparent reason. This also marks the point where they stop being intentionally funny.
Meant for Work
Why John Hodgman is funny as a crotchety old man should be apparent to everybody except the people who wrote this ad. He's charming, lovable, and has a natural wit. He couldn't be offensive to anybody even if he were eating a live puppy while singing an original song entitled "Hitler is My Best Friend in the World" (At the same time, how impressive). As for the message of this commercial, it's hard to argue with. If you want to buy your kids a two thousand dollar toy, get them a Mac.
Sales Pitch
Little known fact: this ad was created for the Bizarro world, where Macs vastly outnumber PCs. It found its way into our world when somebody made a paradox by creating a grape soda commercial that was totally fucking awesome. Any time it aired, it punched a hole in the space-time continuum, and we saw this ad instead.
Gift Exchange
AGAIN WITH THE FUCKING iPHOTO! GOD-FUCK-A-DOODLE-SHIT-ASS-CUNT-MOTHER-FUCKING-ASS-BANDIT-COCKSUCKER-CHIN-PUBE-RAPSCALLION!!!! He printed out a photo album, he's not fucking Norman Borlaug.
Goodwill
Man, you guys are just determined to portray Hodgman as a baby-stomping monster, aren't you? "Look, not only does he hate children, he hates Christmas too!" The man just doesn't have a mean spirited bone in his body, that's why it's so funny watching him play such a sociopath.
Surgery
Yeah, he's right, all that upgrading bullshit is for losers! What am I, a scientician? I can't put these "doodads" into my "thinky box." Lucky for me, I own a Mac, so all I have to do is buy a brand new compooter! How do I know when it's time to empty my wallet? Simple, when I install the latest update and everything starts chugging! Why it's so easy, even a baby could do it. If it had a lot of money. And a credit card. And a shipping address.
Sabotage
It's actually getting to the point where Justin Long doesn't even have to be in the commercials anymore. Hodgman could just come out, take a dump on some orphans, and then say, "Don't buy a Mac."
Tech Support
Yep, nothing says wave of the future like a camera the size of a pinhole. Remember in grade school science class when you made a pinhole camera out of a shoebox and it didn't fucking work? Well now you can bring that kind of wonder to the digital world! With it you can take a picture of your face, GRAINY CELL PHONE STYLE! The possibilities are endless! You could take a picture of you smiling, or you sticking out your tongue, or show how much of a rebel you are by flipping off your own camera like you just don't give a shit! I guess the possibilities aren't endless after all, but THE POSSIBILITIES ARE THREE!
Security
Making fun of Vista is like shooting a retarded kid, it's too easy, should be illegal, and if you miss, it can only mean you're even more retarded. Vista's security software may be shitty, but it's a hell of a lot more grand than nothing. To confuse an already confusing gun metaphor, you don't challenge someone to a gunfight and then show up holding nothing but a smug sense of self-satisfaction. Because the other guy probably has a gun. Or maybe he just has a really pointy rock, but hey, still better than you.
Well, I hope you enjoyed joining me on this long and pointless excuse to post a bunch of YouTube clips in an effort to do as little real work as possible. And in the likely event that any of these clips get taken down, let me know, and I'll be sure to replace them with this video of an adorable Japanese kitten:
Self-Pity
Hey look, he's wearing a suit! It's okay, you can start taking us seriously again because our guy is wearing a suit! He's still rocking the chin pubes, but now he's responsible and shit. On an unrelated note, this much-touted Microsoft Office costs $350. Open Office costs 350 less dollars than that, and is multiplatform to boot.
Better Results
Looks like iMovie takes this contest. By the way, the word professional has been changed to mean "timeline of crap you shot with your friends with no real way sense of flow or timing." Just try to limit the cheesy pseudo-3d transition effects to like, 4 or 5 times per minute, guys. It's called restraint.
Counselor
This one marks a turning point for the series. At this point, the ads had been running for a while, and it seems people were identifying more with the PC Guy (which, can you blame them, being played by the infinitely huggable John Hodgman), so they started making his character into an asshole for no apparent reason. This also marks the point where they stop being intentionally funny.
Meant for Work
Why John Hodgman is funny as a crotchety old man should be apparent to everybody except the people who wrote this ad. He's charming, lovable, and has a natural wit. He couldn't be offensive to anybody even if he were eating a live puppy while singing an original song entitled "Hitler is My Best Friend in the World" (At the same time, how impressive). As for the message of this commercial, it's hard to argue with. If you want to buy your kids a two thousand dollar toy, get them a Mac.
Sales Pitch
Little known fact: this ad was created for the Bizarro world, where Macs vastly outnumber PCs. It found its way into our world when somebody made a paradox by creating a grape soda commercial that was totally fucking awesome. Any time it aired, it punched a hole in the space-time continuum, and we saw this ad instead.
Gift Exchange
AGAIN WITH THE FUCKING iPHOTO! GOD-FUCK-A-DOODLE-SHIT-ASS-CUNT-MOTHER-FUCKING-ASS-BANDIT-COCKSUCKER-CHIN-PUBE-RAPSCALLION!!!! He printed out a photo album, he's not fucking Norman Borlaug.
Goodwill
Man, you guys are just determined to portray Hodgman as a baby-stomping monster, aren't you? "Look, not only does he hate children, he hates Christmas too!" The man just doesn't have a mean spirited bone in his body, that's why it's so funny watching him play such a sociopath.
Surgery
Yeah, he's right, all that upgrading bullshit is for losers! What am I, a scientician? I can't put these "doodads" into my "thinky box." Lucky for me, I own a Mac, so all I have to do is buy a brand new compooter! How do I know when it's time to empty my wallet? Simple, when I install the latest update and everything starts chugging! Why it's so easy, even a baby could do it. If it had a lot of money. And a credit card. And a shipping address.
Sabotage
It's actually getting to the point where Justin Long doesn't even have to be in the commercials anymore. Hodgman could just come out, take a dump on some orphans, and then say, "Don't buy a Mac."
Tech Support
Yep, nothing says wave of the future like a camera the size of a pinhole. Remember in grade school science class when you made a pinhole camera out of a shoebox and it didn't fucking work? Well now you can bring that kind of wonder to the digital world! With it you can take a picture of your face, GRAINY CELL PHONE STYLE! The possibilities are endless! You could take a picture of you smiling, or you sticking out your tongue, or show how much of a rebel you are by flipping off your own camera like you just don't give a shit! I guess the possibilities aren't endless after all, but THE POSSIBILITIES ARE THREE!
Security
Making fun of Vista is like shooting a retarded kid, it's too easy, should be illegal, and if you miss, it can only mean you're even more retarded. Vista's security software may be shitty, but it's a hell of a lot more grand than nothing. To confuse an already confusing gun metaphor, you don't challenge someone to a gunfight and then show up holding nothing but a smug sense of self-satisfaction. Because the other guy probably has a gun. Or maybe he just has a really pointy rock, but hey, still better than you.
Well, I hope you enjoyed joining me on this long and pointless excuse to post a bunch of YouTube clips in an effort to do as little real work as possible. And in the likely event that any of these clips get taken down, let me know, and I'll be sure to replace them with this video of an adorable Japanese kitten:
Thursday, March 1, 2007
Hello, I'm a SHITTY COMPUTER
Don't even try to pretend you don't know what I'm talking about. Watch any tv show, at any time of day and you'll see at least one of these ads. You know, the ones with two guys standing against a white background, one of them is Justin Long looking unwashed and hipster cool, and the other is that hilarious guy from the Daily Show wearing a tweedy suit and generally acting like a complete dork (that's no act, that's just the lovable charm of John Hodgman, and you should buy his book, The Areas of My Expertise).
While these commercials are surprisingly hilarious, and even more surprisingly, intentionally so (or at least they started that way, more on that later), they have the notable handicap of having to sell a product that costs twice as much money and is capable of doing less. How do they accomplish this goal? The rhetorical answer to that rhetorical question is simple, they lie their stinking five hundred dollar designer jeans off. So, partly out of a dedication to truth, justice, and two button mice, and partly just because they're damn funny and I want to collect them all in one place, here is my annotated list of every commercial in the creatively named series, "Get a Mac."
WSJ
Yes, if it's printed in a newspaper, it must be true! They wouldn't print just anything, you know. They've got standards.
Network
First off, what the fuck is going on in this commercial? Secondly, did Apple stop following PC trends in 1996? I don't have to install shit to get my Windows machine to grab anything off any device I can plug into those curiously square holes. Also, I'd like to point out that the last time Macs had this advantage, they looked like this.
iLife
Perhaps the most convincing argument yet. Yes, only a Mac comes with simplified, stripped down versions of programs straight out of the box! Hmm, maybe that's why Macs are so expensive. That extra thousand dollars is going to pay for programs you can find for free on a real computer.
Better
Now here's a winning strategy, start your commercial by pointing out your complete lack of basic office software, and how you eventually had to license your competitor's software just so your computer would have basic functionality. Then after a surprising bit of honesty, it's back to more lies.
Restarting
Occasionally, I find myself having to use a Mac for some purpose, usually because I'm in a public place and have no other option. This commercial is nothing but a bold-faced lie, as I can attest that the accursed things still freeze up quite often, usually 2 or 3 times each session. And thanks to the amazing design decision of not including a reset button, you have to pull the power plug to restart it. I haven't had Windows randomly freeze on me ONCE in the last seven years.
Viruses
Of course, there aren't any viruses for Macs, not because of security, but just because so few people use Macs that nobody is really interested in creating viruses for them.
Work vs. Home
So, Windows based PCs are not only incapable of displaying pictures, but what few graphics they can display are only in grayscale? Wait a minute, this sounds familiar.
Touché
Quick, before anyone can make the obvious response to our weak claim, let's cover it up with a raging straw man fallacy! Touché!
Out of the Box
Unless your BRAND NEW MAC looks like this, we've got another damned lie on our hands.
Trust Mac
Vote Jim Milquetoast for US Senate! A man you can trust, because he's so damn boring, criminals are totally disinterested in associating with him! And he can't ever be corrupted, because he has no friends! Damn you, Jim Milquetoast, you may have logic on your side this time, but I swear I will win the day in the end! MWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Ahem, what the fuck was I talking about again?
Angel/Devil
Man, they sure love that iPhoto program, don't they? I don't think I can come up with anything more to say about fucking iPhoto. iPhoto is not the goddamn savior of the universe, STOP RAMMING IT DOWN OUR FUCKING THROATS! Seriously.
Accident
...
...
Okay, even I have to admit that little connector is fucking awesome. Damn, I wish I had one of those.
Fine Mac, you've won 1 point out out of 12 this round. Stay tuned for the second, and final (at least for now) round, coming soon.
While these commercials are surprisingly hilarious, and even more surprisingly, intentionally so (or at least they started that way, more on that later), they have the notable handicap of having to sell a product that costs twice as much money and is capable of doing less. How do they accomplish this goal? The rhetorical answer to that rhetorical question is simple, they lie their stinking five hundred dollar designer jeans off. So, partly out of a dedication to truth, justice, and two button mice, and partly just because they're damn funny and I want to collect them all in one place, here is my annotated list of every commercial in the creatively named series, "Get a Mac."
WSJ
Yes, if it's printed in a newspaper, it must be true! They wouldn't print just anything, you know. They've got standards.
Network
First off, what the fuck is going on in this commercial? Secondly, did Apple stop following PC trends in 1996? I don't have to install shit to get my Windows machine to grab anything off any device I can plug into those curiously square holes. Also, I'd like to point out that the last time Macs had this advantage, they looked like this.
iLife
Perhaps the most convincing argument yet. Yes, only a Mac comes with simplified, stripped down versions of programs straight out of the box! Hmm, maybe that's why Macs are so expensive. That extra thousand dollars is going to pay for programs you can find for free on a real computer.
Better
Now here's a winning strategy, start your commercial by pointing out your complete lack of basic office software, and how you eventually had to license your competitor's software just so your computer would have basic functionality. Then after a surprising bit of honesty, it's back to more lies.
Restarting
Occasionally, I find myself having to use a Mac for some purpose, usually because I'm in a public place and have no other option. This commercial is nothing but a bold-faced lie, as I can attest that the accursed things still freeze up quite often, usually 2 or 3 times each session. And thanks to the amazing design decision of not including a reset button, you have to pull the power plug to restart it. I haven't had Windows randomly freeze on me ONCE in the last seven years.
Viruses
Of course, there aren't any viruses for Macs, not because of security, but just because so few people use Macs that nobody is really interested in creating viruses for them.
Work vs. Home
So, Windows based PCs are not only incapable of displaying pictures, but what few graphics they can display are only in grayscale? Wait a minute, this sounds familiar.
Touché
Quick, before anyone can make the obvious response to our weak claim, let's cover it up with a raging straw man fallacy! Touché!
Out of the Box
Unless your BRAND NEW MAC looks like this, we've got another damned lie on our hands.
Trust Mac
Vote Jim Milquetoast for US Senate! A man you can trust, because he's so damn boring, criminals are totally disinterested in associating with him! And he can't ever be corrupted, because he has no friends! Damn you, Jim Milquetoast, you may have logic on your side this time, but I swear I will win the day in the end! MWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Ahem, what the fuck was I talking about again?
Angel/Devil
Man, they sure love that iPhoto program, don't they? I don't think I can come up with anything more to say about fucking iPhoto. iPhoto is not the goddamn savior of the universe, STOP RAMMING IT DOWN OUR FUCKING THROATS! Seriously.
Accident
...
...
Okay, even I have to admit that little connector is fucking awesome. Damn, I wish I had one of those.
Fine Mac, you've won 1 point out out of 12 this round. Stay tuned for the second, and final (at least for now) round, coming soon.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)