The Infamous Video

Yep, there she is snorting away. At first the spanish(?) narration was annoying, but as the video progressed it was half the reason to watch. blahblahblah... Kate Moss... blahblahblahblah... cocaine... blahblahblah... Kate... blah... cocaine... blahblahblahblah... Pete Doherty... blahblah... cocaine... blahblah... Kate Moss.

de Young

So I finally made it to the de Young today. I have a selection of some of the pieces I was able to see. It is a gorgeous museum, although the layout was a bit confusing. It just seemed a little, well, jumbled I suppose. I have to say I was pretty disappointed. I was looking forward to the Pacific art section, which was pretty lacking. There were a lot of artifacts from New Guinea(see the first photo for an example), but not much else. I was impressed by some of the Central American art(see the second to last photo for a great example of some Mayan work). There modern art collection also had a few interesting pieces, some of which you can see below. Oh, and the one of a bunch of blurry dots, was just that blurry. It isn't the fault of my camera like the first pic. In fact I think that might have been my favorite piece (the blurry dots not the ancestor mask, which is a real human skull, I hope my skull isn't on display in some museum hundreds of years from now, I'd be pissed, but that is another story). Back to the blurry dots, it was incredibly large, I would guess it was about (roughly that is) 40 by 60 feet or so. It really made your head hurt if you got up right close to it. Damn brain trying to focus. Although maybe my favorite was the Medusa Barbie photo, that was pretty hot. Anyhow. I would say if you are looking for more native arts then try the Asian Art Museum, which has an extraordinary collection of art from all over Asia. Beautiful and well organized to boot. And if you are more interested in European art, I say go to the Legion of Honor(my favorite bay area museum).

I love the Muppets

No text needed

Finally, the anouncement comes

Here we go now. Finally, we get the truth. Sulu is gay. After years of speculation, George Takei comes out of the closet. Now, my only question is, "what about Uhura?"

Some things just piss me off

Does this Intelligent Design bullshit piss off anybody else as much as it does me? I sure hope not. Why does it piss me off? Because those who believe in it apparently don't know much about basic scientific principles.

I found this article on Slate, and found it rather amusing before becoming a little disturbed at the audacity of some so-called scientists (I like to think of them as bastards, how bout yourself?).

The Brontosaurus
Monty Python's flying creationism.
By William Saletan

"There is an elephant in the roomful of scientists who are trying to explain the development of life," wrote Michael Behe, a professor of biochemistry, in his 1996 book Darwin's Black Box. The elephant was ubiquitous evidence of "intelligent design" in nature. Darwinian evolutionists, Behe argued, were unable to explain life's origins and its emerging complexity because they couldn't see the elephant.

Behe has the same problem, but worse. Last week in a Pennsylvania courtroom, he testified in defense of a school board's requirement that biology teachers mention ID. (For Hanna Rosin's reports from the trial, click here.) Behe offered a number of interesting criticisms of Darwinism. But it's impossible to focus on any of these criticisms, because they were so completely overshadowed by the brontosaurus in the room: ID's sophomoric emptiness.

What makes Behe's non-explanation a brontosaurus rather than an elephant is its resemblance to a famous Monty Python sketch in which a television newsman interviews a theorist.

Q: You say you have a new theory about the brontosaurus.
A: Can I just say here, Chris, for one moment, that I have a new theory about the brontosaurus.
Q: Exactly. Well, what is it? …
A: Oh, what is my theory?
Q: Yes.
A: Oh, what is my theory, that it is. Well, Chris, you may well ask me what is my theory.
Q: I am asking.
A: Good for you. My word, yes. Well, Chris, what is it that it is—this theory of mine. Well, this is what it is—my theory that I have, that is to say, which is mine, is mine.
Q: Yes, I know it's yours. What is it?
A: Where? Oh, what is my theory? This is it. My theory that belongs to me is as follows. This is how it goes. The next thing I'm going to say is my theory. Ready?
Q: Yes.
A: … This theory goes as follows and begins now. All brontosauruses are thin at one end; much, much thicker in the middle; and then thin again at the far end.

As though that explained anything. Which brings us to last week's cross-examination of Behe by Eric Rothschild, the lawyer opposing the school board in the Pennsylvania case.

Q: Please describe the mechanism that intelligent design proposes for how complex biological structures arose.
A: Well, the word "mechanism" can be used in many ways. … When I was referring to intelligent design, I meant that we can perceive that in the process by which a complex biological structure arose, we can infer that intelligence was involved. …
Q: What is the mechanism that intelligent design proposes?
A: And I wonder, could—am I permitted to know what I replied to your question the first time?
Q: I don't think I got a reply, so I'm asking you. You've made this claim here (reading): "Intelligent design theory focuses exclusively on the proposed mechanism of how complex biological structures arose." And I want to know, what is the mechanism that intelligent design proposes for how complex biological structures arose?
A: Again, it does not propose a mechanism in the sense of a step-by-step description of how those structures arose. But it can infer that in the mechanism, in the process by which these structures arose, an intelligent cause was involved.

The interrogation goes on like this for pages and pages. Like the theorist in the Monty Python sketch, Behe throws up a blizzard of babble: process, intelligent activity, important facts. What process? What activity? What facts? He never explains. He says the designer "took steps" to create complex biological systems, but ID can't specify the steps. Does ID tell us who designed life? No, he answers. Does it tell us how? No. Does it tell us when? No. How would the designer create a bacterial flagellum? It would "somehow cause the plan to, you know, go into effect," he proposes.

Can ID make testable predictions? Not really. If we posit that a given biological system was designed, Rothschild asks, what can we infer about the designer's abilities? Just "that the designer had the ability to make the design that is under consideration," says Behe. "Beyond that, we would be extrapolating beyond the evidence." Does Behe not understand that extrapolating beyond initial evidence is exactly the job of a hypothesis? Does he not grasp the meaninglessness of saying a designer designed things that were designed?

Evidently not. "That is exactly the basis for how we detect design—when we perceive the purposeful arrangement of parts," Behe declares. The essence of science—that detection means going beyond perception—escapes his comprehension. It also escapes his interest. He says his belief that the bacterial flagellum was intelligently designed could be tested, but he's never run the test. Why not? "I'm persuaded by the evidence that I cite in my book that this is a good explanation and that spending a lot of effort in trying to show how random mutation and natural selection could produce complex systems … is not real likely to be fruitful," he says. Who needs science when you've got faith?

So, this is my theory, which belongs to me, and goes as follows. All intelligently designed things are brought about by an intelligent designer through a process of intelligently conducted design. If it's good enough for Monty Python, it's good enough for biology class.

This is just disturbing

Smoking and Berkeley

I am becoming more upset and disturbed by the continuing criminalization of smoking (yes, cigarette smoking) throughout the Bay Area. Earlier this year San Francisco made it illegal to smoke in any of their public parks. Now, I am a conscientious smoker. I don't sit down by a bunch of people and light up a cigarette, that would be rude, but I also don't move if someone sits down next to me while I am smoking. That only makes sense to me, if you don't like my second hand smoke, then don't sit next to me. Besides just the second hand smoke issue, one reason for not permitting smoking in parks was that there a cigarette butts everywhere on the ground. I never throw away my butts on the ground. So, why am I punished, and there are already applicable littering laws to discourage just that, littering. Absurdity.

But the wonderful city of Berkeley wants to take it even further. They want to ban smoking in "structures housing multiple residents" (why not just call them apartment buildings bitches!). Now this is absurd. They want to make it so your neighbors can call the police about your smoking and have you cited. Bastards! All of them are bastards!

Global warming and Torture

I recently discovered why the Bush administration refuses to acknowledge the grotesque abundance of scientific data for global warming. It also helps explain why we are using Guantanamo to secure and interrogate so-called enemy combatants. Scarily enough it has to do with a brand new torture practice involving hurricanes and duct tape. In the picture below, you can see one of the initial test subjects for this new bizarre technique first envisioned by Dick Cheney.

Ouch

Ok, now this would hurt. That is this would hurt if it happened to me. I'm surprised the person with the camera isn't laughing their ass off. I would definitely have been. People falling down is surprisingly refreshing for me. Anything falling amuses me I suppose. Like anvils for instance. And dead video game ducks. And my credit card balance. And the popularity of George W. Bush.

Hmmm....

So I was fucking around with this program named Picasa. It is a photo organizer/editor type program. Anyways, I enjoy it immensely, especially this collage function. Which brings me to this picture. I really like how it is a bit creepy. Anywho, enjoy.

The Plucker

The Plucker leaned down until its face hung a kiss away from Angel, peeled back its black lips, and exposed the most sincere smile its rotting teeth would allow. "You will be such a treat," it whispered.

If you're feeling sinister...

blah blah blah minsiter blah blah blah unbeliever...


Madonna

This somehow reminds me of Busty Wilde's post about that plastic surgery addicted man..

sad.



I don't love anything...

blah blah blah my baby brother blah blah blah one thing I learned...

Buy her Candy

This picture to the left was all I got to see at the de Young Museum' grand reopening this past Saturday. It was perhaps a little disappointing to see such an emormous line waiting for us at the entrance. It was still an interesting voyage into the city, and a nice race back to Oaktown (as to make it on the bridge before they closed it). I'm still a bit amazed that the bridge was closed at all. While I suppose the repairs are supposed to make us safer, all it does is reinforce the idea that the entire bridge could go at any one moment. (pause) I just keep saying at least it isn't as bad as some of those bridges to the north.

Well, anyways, I still am excited about eventually going to the de Young; I think it will have to wait for several weeks. Let things cool off for a bit. Definitely before the Hatshepsut or the Catherine Wagner exhibit are gone. Which in fact gives me several months so, hmm.

toxic?

Heffalumps?

I think I had a dream that I stole a Pink Heffalump from Disney World once, maybe it wasn't a dream.

One more for good measure

After screwing around on the internet for a while last night in search of random and weird nature pics, I became pretty lethargic and ended up turning off the computer and almost immediately passed out. I hadn't planned on posting any of the pics I had come across, but this Vietnamese grasshopper repeatedly appeared in my dreams. Now, I don't often remember any dreams I may have, so when I woke up this morning with vivid memories of my dreams I decided it might be worthwhile to post the picture. Don't ask what my dream was about, cause I've been up for several hours already today and already forgot the details. I should have got online before work, oh well...

Here's another crazy pic from the wonderful world of nature

So, after the gruesome pic of that American alligator and Burmese python, I thought hell, I can find other weird pics of nature. So here we go, this is a two-headed Western diamondback rattlesnake recently found in San Angelo, TX. Besides having two heads, the snake also hadtwo hearts, two gall bladders, two tracheae, and a divided liver. Now that is Hot.

The dangers of not waiting until your food is dead

In this photo provided by the Everglades National Park, the carcass of a six-foot American alligator is shown protruding from the midsection of a 13-foot Burmese python Monday, Sept. 26, 2005 in Everglades National Park, Fla., after the snake apparently swallowed the alligator, resulting in the deaths of both animals.

Now that must have been one nasty fight. In reading the accompanying article to this picture, they hypothesize that the alligator "may have clawed at the python's stomach as the snake tried to digest it, leading to the blow up." Oh, and apparently the head of the alligator was still in the python's stomach.

Nature at its best.

I need a symbol.  

Sad Times

For some reason this bear just made me sad. Not being good enough, he was just thrown out into the sidewalk. Eventually being knocked off the sidewalk and under some brush, he's been languishing outside my apartment building a few days shy of a month.