If I Ruled the World...

...all skip loaders would be pink.

Three Degrees of Stupidity

Would you rather be called an idiot or a moron? Neither probably, but surprisingly there is (or was originally) a substantial difference between the two. The words were invented by an American psychologist (and eugenicist) Henry H. Goddard as a means of classifying degrees of mental incompetency.
The scale is as follows (in my own words not H.H. Goddards. He was a little more..er..technical than I am):

Idiot: IQ 0-25, with 0 being a hula hoop. Mentally you are somewhere between a rock and a hard place...literally. This is the worst of the worst, the bottom of the barrel. If you are an idiot then you might to learn how to tie your shoes but most likely you'll just end up trying to eat them. If you were smart enough to list your favorite things to do drooling would be at the top followed closely by watching Melrose Place.

Imbicile: IQ 26-50, The good news is you aren't an idiot. The bad news is you are still an imbicile. You might not be the sharpest tool in the shed, but at least you can learn how to use one. If evolution worked according to mental capacity you'd be somewhere between a lab rat and a golden retriever (both of which are better groomed than you).

Moron: IQ 51-70, You are the highest of the low if you fall into this category. When someone calls you a moron, you say with pride "Well, at least I am not an imbicile." You (being a moron) think it's a compliment but the rest of us know it's not. It's like being employee of the month at a company that specializes in scrubbing poop stains out of carpet, or being the champion of a hot dog eating contest (both of which morons are good at by the way). Sure you are the best, but is that really a good thing? Bottom line is you aren't smart enough to work a dishwasher but you can whip a five year old's ass at Connect Four, (and are damn proud of it).

Christmas List 2010: Item 2

What's the Difference?

Magma and lava...are they the same thing? The answer is yes and no (and you were worried this would be confusing!) They are physically the same (i.e. they have the same minerals, and are molten etc.) but they do not exist in the same environment. That's the key. That's why there are two words to describe it and not one. Magma refers to molten rock located underground. Think of magma chambers under volcanoes, or super hot melted rock in the mantle that creates "hot spots" like Hawaii or the Galapagos.
As soon as the molten magma reaches the surface however, it is called lava. Lava is expelled from a volcano, and can produce huge flows on the surface. It is molten for a short time, then hardens as it cools. If you are still confused please refer to the above figure for technical details, and further clarification. (Double click on image for larger view.)

It's a Bird...It's a Plane...No Wait! It's Dinner!

I came across an advertisement for a company called Dinner In The Sky. They provide food, drinks and entertainment, for a party of 22 seated at a table suspended 150 feet in the air from a CRANE! (They will set up the crane wherever you like too). Possibly the craziest part is that it isn't enclosed. You are literally strapped into your chair, and there is a tiny foot rest, but if your napkin fell of you lap, or a piece of broccoli were to leap off your plate, it would plummet straight to the ground below. I am not sure what happens when it get's windy, or when it rains, or if a flock of seagulls happens to be passing through, or if you have to pee.
I can't decide if I think it's a really cool idea, or a really stupid one. It's absurd, that's for sure. What do you think?

Coming Clean about Pumice

I was just thinking about how unfortunate it is that most people don't know anything about geology. It's a really cool field of science. Part of the reason I think has to do with the fact that most people think geology is sort of useless. They think, what do rocks have to do with me? So instead of writing a novel about how untrue that is, I thought I would instead focus on one type of rock and use it as a small example of how geology impacts our lives.
Pumice. It's a light, porous, rock formed when water rich lava is extruded from volcanoes. Technically it is volcanic glass, like obsidian except with lots and lots of holes in it. When Karakatoa (located in Indonesia) erupted in the late 1800's pumice that formed during the blast actually floated (yep...rocks can float) all the way to the west coast of Africa. (As a side note, Krakatoa by S. Winchester is an amazing book! You should read it.)
So of what use is this to us? Well, you may not know it but pumice is all around us. It is used as landscaping rock (a red type called scoria), and we use it to exfoliate our skin. Pumice is also the main material in the mixture your dentist puts on your teeth during a cleaning that makes them feel smooth and fresh. Pumice is used in many cleaners as an abrasive (things like Soft Scrub etc.), It's sometimes used in cement when the construction projects require lighter weight materials. And it is super useful when placing drunken bets with friends that rocks can in fact float.
So the next time you are getting your teeth cleaned think about the fact that at some point in the past that pumice that is making your teeth all nice and shiny once resided as a liquid in the belly of a volcano. See I told you. Geology is awesome!

Science is Sexy

I am thinking about going into the greeting card business (this one's for Valentines Day)....and subliminally bringing science to the masses.

Long Story Short

Do you ever find yourself doing weird things that don't make sense even to you? And then do you wonder why you keep doing it over and over even after you know it doesn't make sense?
Well, that's my situation with my hair. It's pretty long, and for the most part it is just a huge pain in the ass. I never fix it because then I would have to get up at like 5:00 in the morning everyday, and I am just waaay to lazy for that. Long hair is awful at the gym too because it's hot, and then I have to wash it every day, which is time consuming. I have probably spent a month washing my hair, and $1000 on conditioner over the past ten years (I could take a trip to Hawaii for $1000!) . It's all work and no fun. So my locks, for the most part, spend their miserable, split-ended existence all scrunched up in a pony tail holder at the back of my head. So you might think why not just cut it and avoid the hassle?
I will tell you why. It's because soon the thought of cutting it crosses my mind, my hair suddenly becomes my favorite thing IN THE UNIVERSE and I just can't part with it. The tangles, and HOURS of brushing are forgotten, and all I have is the happy memory of how nice it looked that one time six months ago when I actually took the time to blow dry it.
Once (sometimes twice) a year I am confronted with this situation. I get so fed up with my hair that I make an appointment for a cut and tell myself This is it! I am gonna do it! Then once I am there in the chair I panic and my palms get sweaty and I just can't go through with it. I can't stomach the thought of chopping it off. It feels wrong, like killing a puppy or wearing two different shades of brown in the same outfit. So I end up spending $50 getting 1/4 inch taken off the bottom. Afterward I feel relieved. Yay, my long hair has been saved! Then while I am driving home from the salon I end up throwing it into a pony tail because it's hot, and annoying me, and flying everywhere because the window is rolled down. And the cycle begins anew.
I have done this literally for years. It doesn't make an ounce of sense, but there you have it.

Christmas List 2010: Item 1

Why I Fear for the Future of Humanity: Part 1

Crap, how do you work these things again?...Oh wait, there's a number I can call. Whew. That was a close one.

9 Gets a 1 out of 10

It is astonishing what passes for kid's movies these days. I practically had nightmares last night after watching the movie 9. (It's one of those digitally animated cartoons.) It was so scary! They showed corpses of humans littered throughout a post-apocalyptic city destroyed by and army of machines. This includes a dead mother holding her dead baby in a pick up truck. An odd choice I thought.
The main characters are little burlap covered robot men crudely assembled with numbers on their back (which represent aspects of the soul of the scientist who created them and that he infused with their bodies), and a giant machine with a red eye that reminds me of The Lord of the Rings, that makes other machines to hunt and kill the little burlap guys.
One of these other machines had a doll heads with the lower jaw missing and one red eye and the body of snake! Can it get any scarier than that? It was like Chucky on a serpent body. Truly frightening I tell you! Is that something you would want a kid to see? Is that something YOU want to see?
On top of that most of the 9 burlap guys do die, by having their life sucked out of their mouth and eyeballs by a flashing light on the machine. (I get the shivers just thinking about it).
Anyway my point is, it was absolutely inappropriate for kids, and most adults too for that matter. It was scary, it wasn't funny at all, it was depressing, AND the story line was weak, and poorly thought out. I guess they were trying to make a point about technology, but I am not sure. Maybe they were trying to make a kids version of the Terminator? Anyway, terrible movie! Don't see it with kids!

Boredom: A Workout for Your Brain

"If you, like many people, have spent your workday in a Walter Mitty–like haze wishing you were anywhere but the office, your medial temporal lobe subsystem, precuneus, medial prefrontal subsystem, and posterior cingulate cortex—the regions dispersed throughout the brain that together make up the DMN, a key player in daydreaming—have been lit up like a Christmas tree."

WOW! That is totally me right now! And here I thought I was being wholly unproductive and doing nothing. Who knew my precuneus was getting such a workout?
That quote incidentally came from an article I read entitled The Anatomy of a Brain Fart. Don't ask how I discovered this article. It was just happenstance. It's a quick easy read though, very scientific and they use the word fart like, 14 times!(It is a mystery to me why I chuckle every time I see the word "fart"...see? I just did it again!) So is totally worth the five minutes. Ok...I have to go. It's back to stimulating my posterior cingulate cortex...*sigh* I am so busy!

Philosophical Physics

There are lots of disciplines that fall under the heading of science. But what is science? How is it defined? And are all the current "scientific fields" really qualified to be called such?
I was reading an article about...well, to be completely honest, I am not really sure. The general topic was physics. It was a little over my head. Something to do with string theory and the gap between relativity and quantum physics...and lastly theoretical physics.
I think it's ironic that the the only one of the above mentioned that made any sense to me was the least "scientific" in my opinion. That was my first inkling that it might be misplaced.

Theoretical physics. It's cool, it's mind bending, it uses neat phrases like "space-time" and "alternate universes and parallel dimensions." It reminds me of Star Trek, and in general I love it. But at the same time I have noted that a lot of the ideas it puts forth to explain/understand the universe, seem extremely abstract, and from my limited understanding are non-testable. And if the theories are not subject to the scrutinies of the scientific method, then are they really theories at all? Should they exist under the umbrella of science?
To be clear, I am not talking about all branches of physics. I am only talking about the ultra abstract theoretical part. If, for example, you argue that there may be million of parallel universes, but we will only ever exist in our own, what is the value of speculating about it? What is scientific about it? Some scientists believe that for every universe that forms, an original brand of physics is created to accompany it. Ok, that sounds cool, but unless we expect to find ourselves somehow surviving the end of our present universe, and subsequently making it into the next, I don't see how that has anything to do with science. It's just as absurd to speculate about whether or not we will make it into heaven.
I don't think it is valueless, I just don't think it falls under the realm of true testable science. It seems too philosophical to me. I think it should be renamed philosophical physics. But maybe I'm wrong...Or maybe I am wrong in this universe, but right in another one! It's hard to say.

The Kidney Conundrum

I recently read an article (in Discover magazine)about organ harvesting in third world countries. They primarily discussed the sale of kidneys on the black market. I have to admit I was really shocked that such a thing happens. I realize that a person can get by with only one kidney, but I also have to note that we are all born with two which means that there is an evolutionary advantage to having a pair.
Anyway, the article explained how most of the kidneys come from poor people in rural parts of India and various countries in South America, where people are desperate and may sell them for as little as $300. It is terrible to consider being in such dire straits that you would be willing to start selling parts of your body off.
They also mentioned that in China organs are regularly harvested from criminals particularly the people on (their equivalent of) death row. And this is actually what I wanted to talk about.
At first glance this seemed like a good idea to me. If they are going to be put to death anyway, why not save someone else' life with their organs? Why waste a perfectly good kidney when it's only the mind of the murder that has gone bad? And if an individual has taken a life, doesn't it seem only fair they should be required to help save one in return?
But then the more I thought about it, the more I decided against it. First of all I was assuming the person in prison actually committed the crimes they were incarcerated for. Obviously that is often not the case, especially in China. And then I got to thinking about basic human rights. It's one thing to execute someone (actually I am not at all sure what I think about executions, but that is a topic for another day), and quite another to cut them open and remove a part of their body. That is exploitation isn't it? And then you run into the problem of governments putting more people to death simply because they want more money, and need more organs to attain it, and so it gets all muddled. But do you waste perfectly good organs that could go to needy people based on principal?
I must admit these are very preliminary thoughts. Like I said before, I'd never even heard of this before yesterday. I certainly think taking organs from poor, ignorant, desperate people is a crime, but does anyone have any thoughts on taking them from death row prisoners who will be executed either way?

"Thoreau" the Forest and Off the Grid...

I know someone who has decided to give up everything (i.e. career, house, etc.) and live off the land in a trailer in Oregon somewhere. And I don't know what I think about that. On the one hand the thought of getting away from the stress, and (what I consider) ridiculous obligations that most of have seems like a great idea. Living off the land, whittling wood, picking my nose(and doing other things that people who have nothing to do find to occupy themselves) seems just great.
But then I don't know. I mean what if I break my leg and need to have it set? What if I have a hankering for Taco Bell that I just can't get past? What if I want to watch the Super Bowl, or go shopping? What if I want a steak for dinner?
I like the idea of going off the grid, but I think I like the convenience of urban life more.
You know who had the right idea? H.D. Thoreau. His Walden Pond for all it inspired his work on nature and ecology was only about two miles away from downtown Concord . Apparently he could see the train go by from his little cabin! (For some reason I always imagined it being out in the middle of nowhere.) Anyway...maybe that would be my style. Solidude in the middle of everything?