Category "Stuff I wonder about"

May 2, 2006

Hanlon's Razor

I've written about Parkinson's Law, and Parkinson's Law of Triviality. Now, we have Hanlon's Razor.

Hanlon's Razor states:

   Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

I think you'll find that this law is applicable in your daily lives in more ways than one. Personally, I can already apply this law to numerous circumstances I've observed over the last few years. Maybe even events I've seen recently.

What about you?

Posted by snackeru at 6:28 AM | Comments (9) | Stuff I wonder about

Category "Stuff I wonder about"

April 13, 2006



"Ah, but a revolution without dancing is not a revolution worth having."

Posted by snackeru at 9:38 PM | Comments (7) | Stuff I wonder about

Category "Stuff I wonder about"

March 31, 2006

And now for something different: Intelligent Design

One of the more humorous blog posts I've ever read talked about what bloggers should write about on blogs. Rule #3 (or something like that) went something like this: If you are afraid to write about something, that is exactly what you should be writing about. And once you've written about it, do it again. So, I have been afraid of writing about Intelligent Design. I will admit it. But now, I guess, it is time to get my thoughts on the screen. Why now? To that I would say, why not? Don't even try to figure out my thought patterns. Usually I am focused on stadiums, but I do, on occasion, branch out to other controversial topics. I mean, I need to get hate mail about other stuff too every now and again. As always, if you can make it to the bottom of this drivel, let me know what you think.

First of all let me say that if you believe in God, if you believe in a higher power, then by default you also believe in some form of "intelligent design" (lower case i, lower case d). It would be odd to believe in God, but not believe that He created the heavens and the earth. In fact, I would wager that is impossible. Correct me if I'm wrong.

So, since I have made it abundantly clear throughout the course of writing on this blog that I believe in God, I must also say that I believe that He created the heavens and the earth. So far so good. Having said that, though, I honestly believe that the promoters of Intelligent Design are making a huge mistake. Pitting faith against evolution is doing more harm than good. But before I get into that I will write about Galileo.

Galileo? Yes, his life provides a pretty neat illustration of my point. As many of you probably know, Galileo spent a fair amount of his life in prison and under house arrest for promoting the idea of "heliocentrism" or the idea that the Earth revolves around the Sun. Today we laugh at the idea that the Sun could revolve around the Earth. This idea is so unquestionably wrong it isn't even worth discussion. However, back in the 1600s, this discussion was all the rage. Why? Because the Bible actually states, or alludes, in numerous passages that the Earth is the center of the celestial world.

Take for example Psalm 104:

You fixed the earth on its foundation, never to be moved.

Being a Psalm, or a poem, this passage is wide open for a variety of interpretation, but in the 1600s the implications of this Psalm were plainly clear: The Earth does not move.

Another example comes from Joshua 10: 12-13:

Then spake Joshua to the LORD in the day when the LORD delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon. And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. ... So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day.

Again, the interpretation of this passage in the 1600s was that before God told the Sun to stop moving, it actually moved around the Earth. Today we know this line of reason to be unequivocally false. Does this make the Bible wrong? Does this mean the Bible is not the "infallible Word of God"? I would say no. I would say the problem, of course, lies in the perplexing need to literally interpret the Bible at all times and in all instances. Galileo paid a heavy price for his promotion of heliocentrism and his challenging of a literal interpretation of God's word in the matter of the rotation of the heavenly spheres.

St. Augustine actually had some interesting things to say about this. Augustine himself argued against a too literal interpretation of the Bible especially when it deals with matters of science. In an important passage within his "The Literal Interpretation of Genesis" (early 5th century, AD), St. Augustine wrote:

"Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the cycles of the years and the seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he holds to as being certain from reason and experience. Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking non-sense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of the faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men. If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason?"

I think Augustine nailed it here. Promoters of Intelligent Design are doing way more harm than good in using the Bible as a science text book when it should be used more as a path to salvation. Promotion of this deluded teaching of Intelligent Design actually encourages people to abandon the entirety of the Bible. Seriously, what does it matter how God created the heavens and the Earth? What matters is that he did it, and more importantly that he opened the gates of heaven through his Son, Jesus Christ.

Augustine also writes in The Literal Interpretation of Genesis:

With the scriptures it is a matter of treating about the faith. For that reason, as I have noted repeatedly, if anyone, not understanding the mode of divine eloquence, should find something about these matters [about the physical universe] in our books, or hear of the same from those books, of such a kind that it seems to be at variance with the perceptions of his own rational faculties, let him believe that these other things are in no way necessary to the admonitions or accounts or predictions of the scriptures. In short, it must be said that our authors knew the truth about the nature of the skies, but it was not the intention of the Spirit of God, who spoke through them, to teach men anything that would not be of use to them for their salvation.

As you can see, this argument concerning how literally to take the book of Genesis has been on the mind of Christians for quite a while. And hopefully you can see some parallels between the arguments against heliocentrism and now the arguments concerning Intelligent Design. Personally, I do not believe that promotion of evolution is anti-Biblical or anti-Christian, just like I don't think the promotion of heliocentrism is anti-Biblical or anti-Christian. There is too much evidence suggesting that the Earth is billions of years old (not thousands), and that the species and life of Earth have been changing and adapating throughout all that time. And as science continues to uncover more about the origins of life, Christians are going to have to come to grips with more and more of these ideas. It is inevitable.

In conclusion, I refuse to put God in a box. I refuse to even entertain the notion that the creation of the universe and all the wonder that it holds can be contained in approximately 30 verses in the book of Genesis. It is almost comical to think about. This does not mean I am abandoning the word of God. Again the true importance of the Bible can be found in its teachings about religion, neighborly love, salvation, and the words of Jesus. It should not be used as a science text book. Seriously, isn't it more miraculous to think that God put together this amazing system of adaptation and evolutionary change than to think he just said, "Poof! There is a platypus." This does not mean I accept the entirety of evolution either, but I do think it has more scientific accuracy than the story of God literally creating the universe in 6 days. That is my opinion anyway. Feel free to disagree. And now I leave you with something I read in the Washington Post which more eloquently and concisely sums up my feelings:

The relentless attempt to confuse [science and religion] by teaching warmed-over creationism as science can only bring ridicule to religion, gratuitously discrediting a great human endeavor and our deepest source of wisdom precisely about those questions -- arguably, the most important questions in life -- that lie beyond the material.

How ridiculous to make evolution the enemy of God. What could be more elegant, more simple, more brilliant, more economical, more creative, indeed more divine than a planet with millions of life forms, distinct and yet interactive, all ultimately derived from accumulated variations in a single double-stranded molecule, pliable and fecund enough to give us mollusks and mice, Newton and Einstein? Even if it did give us the Kansas State Board of Education, too.

Posted by snackeru at 8:06 AM | Comments (24) | Stuff I wonder about

Category "Stuff I wonder about"

March 23, 2006

There is a billboard outside of the Metrodome...


What the heck is this billboard trying to say? It features a straight, yellow line; a small peg way on the left; a ball; a hole of some sort, and then someone walking. I must be way too dense, because this billboard in no way makes me want to drink whiskey. It makes me say, "Huh?"

Any clues?

Posted by snackeru at 7:27 AM | Comments (3) | Stuff I wonder about

Category "Stuff I wonder about"

March 22, 2006

Earbud covers are the worst invention ever!

• What follows are some instructions for configuring and using your brand new iPod: earbud.jpg

  1. First open the package and locate the instructions.
  2. Following the instructions, install the iPod software and iTunes onto your computer.
  3. Using iTunes, rip a CD onto your computer, or purchase some new music.
  4. Connect your iPod to your computer and put some of your new music onto it.
  5. Locate your headphones and plug them in.

    And now for the most important part of the instructions ...

  6. Locate the earbud covers (also known as earbud foamies or earpads) and immediately throw them in the trash since you will most likely lose them within two weeks anyway!

Someone please tell me: is there a more pathetic product from Apple than the earbud cover? I would like to submit that there is NOT! Egads, these things tick me off. No matter how careful I am, no matter how religiously I check to make sure they are still on my earbuds, they always fall off. And then I am earbud-coverless! Yes, earbud-coverless!

I have no doubt that this is a conspiracy instigated by Apple to make oodles of money. New earbud covers cost upwards of $10 . $10!!! Some fatcat Apple executive is cackling in his office right now over the millions of lemmings giving him more money just so we can lose the new earbud covers in two weeks!

I refuse to play their little game! This post says that replacement earbud covers can be purchased at Radio Shack so that is what I am going to do. Who needs this kind of hassle, though? Now I have to go to Radio Shack? A pox on your house Apple! A pox on your house!

Posted by snackeru at 8:31 AM | Comments (6) | Stuff I wonder about

Category "Books"

Category "Stuff I wonder about"

February 20, 2006

The Miracle of Life

comoconserve.jpg So, I went to the Como Conservatory today. After all this cold we've been having, it was nice to see things green and alive again. If you are feeling in the dumps and you are sick of winter, I must suggest going to the Como Conservatory to brighten your outlook on life. The smells, the freshness, the humidity ... it is all just wonderful.

Anyway, as I was walking through the Conservatory I was struck with the diversity of life in this relatively small, enclosed space. So many different types of trees, plants, and flowers, and as you walk through it you suddenly realize that the variety in the Como Conservatory is really just the tip of the iceberg. It is amazing to think about.

And to stay with the sci-fi theme, why is Earth the only place that we've found so far that has life, and furthermore why do we have life so abundantly? We don't have just a few bacterium struggling to survive on the tip of a comet, we have so many species of life we can't even name them all, and we are still discovering new ones. Again, life is amazing.

Again, these thoughts got me to thinking about Bill Bryson's A Short History of Nearly Everything which coincidentally has a fascinating chapter on this miracle we call life. When you really think about it, the life we have on this planet and the immense variety should make your head explode with wonder. Especially when you consider how difficult it is to even create a simple protein:

Proteins are what you get when you string amino acids together, and we need a lot of them. No one really knows, but there may be as many as a million types of protein in the human body, and each one is a little miracle. By all the laws of probability proteins shouldn’t exist. To make a protein you need to assemble amino acids (which I am obliged by long tradition to refer to here as “the building blocks of life?) in a particular order, in much the same way that you assemble letters in a particular order to spell a word. The problem is that words in the amino acid alphabet are often exceedingly long. To spell collagen, the name of a common type of protein, you need to arrange eight letters in the right order. But to make collagen, you need to arrange 1,055 amino acids in precisely the right sequence. But—and here’s an obvious but crucial point—you don’t make it. It makes itself, spontaneously, without direction, and this is where the unlikelihoods come in.

The chances of a 1,055-sequence molecule like collagen spontaneously self-assembling are, frankly, nil. It just isn’t going to happen. To grasp what a long shot its existence is, visualize a standard Las Vegas slot machine but broadened greatly—to about ninety feet, to be precise—to accommodate 1,055 spinning wheels instead of the usual three or four, and with twenty symbols on each wheel (one for each common amino acid).1 How long would you have to pull the handle before all 1,055 symbols came up in the right order? Effectively forever. Even if you reduced the number of spinning wheels to two hundred, which is actually a more typical number of amino acids for a protein, the odds against all two hundred coming up in a prescribed sequence are 1 in 10260 (that is a 1 followed by 260 zeroes). That in itself is a larger number than all the atoms in the universe.

And this is just proteins. Think about when you connect them all up, stick DNA into the equation, and get plants, and animals, and all the other variety of life we have on this planet. How does your eyelash know to become an eyelash? How does a human embryo know to create a kidney or a pancreas? As Bryson suggests, we shouldn't even be here. How did this happen? Why did it happen?

Feel free to surmise your own reasons. I'm not here to get into an argument. I think we can all agree, though, that life on this planet is a miracle, plain and simple, regardless of how it happened. I choose to rejoice in it.

Posted by snackeru at 8:20 PM | Comments (7) | Books | Stuff I wonder about

Category "Books"

Category "Stuff I wonder about"

February 19, 2006

The Vastness of Space

So, I'm reading an interesting book right now called The Braided World by Kay Kenyon. It is kind of a sequel to her book Maximum Ice (which I enjoyed) so, I thought I would pick this one up too. The Braided World tells of a crew of humans traveling 30 light years to a distant planet with the hopes of finding some of humanity's lost genetic diversity. That is as far as I've gotten.

But what I'd like to write about today is that figure: 30 light years. 30 light years is the distance it takes for light (traveling at the speed of light) to travel if it traveld for 30 years. In other words, 30 light years is a long, long way off. Think about it: even if we had a space craft that could travel at the speed of light, it would have to be able to maintain that speed for 30 years to get to this fictional planet. Needless to say, with our existing technology we aren't anywhere near the ability to become interstellar space travelers anytime soon.

This got me to thinking about another book I've read that describes the vastness of space specifically in our own solar system. In the amazing A Short History of Nearly Everything, Bill Bryson describes space like this (page 24):

Now the first thing you are likely to realize is that space is extremely well named and rather dismayingly uneventful. Our solar system may be the liveliest thing for trillions of miles, but all the visible stuff in it—the Sun, the planets and their moons, the billion or so tumbling rocks of the asteroid belt, comets, and other miscellaneous drifting detritus—fills less than a trillionth of the available space. You also quickly realize that none of the maps you have ever seen of the solar system were remotely drawn to scale. Most schoolroom charts show the planets coming one after the other at neighborly intervals—the outer giants actually cast shadows over each other in many illustrations—but this is a necessary deceit to get them all on the same piece of paper. Neptune in reality isn’t just a little bit beyond Jupiter, it’s way beyond Jupiter—five times farther from Jupiter than Jupiter is from us, so far out that it receives only 3 percent as much sunlight as Jupiter.

Such are the distances, in fact, that it isn’t possible, in any practical terms, to draw the solar system to scale. Even if you added lots of fold-out pages to your textbooks or used a really long sheet of poster paper, you wouldn’t come close. On a diagram of the solar system to scale, with Earth reduced to about the diameter of a pea, Jupiter would be over a thousand feet away and Pluto would be a mile and a half distant (and about the size of a bacterium, so you wouldn’t be able to see it anyway). On the same scale, Proxima Centauri, our nearest star, would be almost ten thousand miles away. Even if you shrank down everything so that Jupiter was as small as the period at the end of this sentence, and Pluto was no bigger than a molecule, Pluto would still be over thirty-five feet away.

In other words, our solar system is absolutely huge compared to the distance we traveled on our last vacations. Bryson goes on to say that it is unlikely that any human will ever visit the edge of our solar system. It is just too far away. It is the reason why science fiction authors always describe space travel through special means like going through wormholes or black holes ... these theories, and theories yet devised, are probably our only hope of ever getting past Mars.

When I read books about humans traveling to distant planets to meet with an alien civilization I can't help but think about stuff like this. Space travel, using our existing technology, is woefully inadequate. Quite frankly, it is impossible. Thus ends another episode of "who gives a rat's butt theater." Stay tuned for more.

Posted by snackeru at 7:48 PM | Comments (3) | Books | Stuff I wonder about

Category "Stuff I wonder about"

January 25, 2006

One more thing

I went to a series of presentations over lunch today concerning wikis, podcasting, videos, and statistics and the work that is being done on campus here at the U of M concerning these technologies. Anyway, after the presentations the audience would clap, as you might expect. But as I sat there beating my hands together I was just overwhelmed by the feeling of how stupid clapping really is. Here we are, about 200 U of M tech people beating our hands together like a bunch of monkeys. Do you know what I mean? Slapping my two palms together to suggest to someone, or a group of people, that I approve of what they had just done. Yesterday I might have said something else, but today I say clapping is absolutely bonehead stupid.

Proof we are descended from monkeys

I guess it is just one of those things that make me wonder.

Posted by snackeru at 3:51 PM | Comments (6) | Stuff I wonder about

Category "Stuff I wonder about"

December 29, 2005

Blogging while everyone is on vacation...

Well, I think everyone is on vacation so I have decided not to spend a whole lotta time thinking about this here site for the next couple of days. That, and I can't think of anything to say right now. I feel a kind of malaise today about sharing any of my precious opinions. Sure I could share, but I don't want to put the effort in (especially if you are all on vacation).

So, if you haven't seen SNL's "Lazy Sunday" rap, do yourself a favor and watch it. It is the most hilarious thing I've seen from SNL in years:

Lazy Sunday

"The Chronic - what? - les of Narnia!!!" Funny, funny stuff...

Posted by snackeru at 8:38 AM | Comments (5) | Stuff I wonder about

Category "Stuff I wonder about"

December 22, 2005

More Kokology!

Take this little test and read the extended entry to reveal something about yourself. Or not. Up to you. And if you do give this a try, really play along. It is pretty interesting.

Deep in the Mountains

The mountains and the sea—nature has a power that draws us to her. After all we are all nature’s children, born into her world and fed on her bounty. No matter what marvels technology may develop, getting back to nature lets us feel truly alive. Medical science may make advances, but the best medicine will always be nature’s own healing power.

Your next journey will take you back to that green world, and what better setting for you to rediscover your natural self?

1. You have set off to climb a mountain, in search of a fabulously rare stone. What is your impression of the mountain as you stand at its foot?

2. After a hard search, you still haven’t found the stone, and now the sun has fallen. What will you do next?

3. You have finally discovered the stone you were seeking. What kind of stone is it? Describe its size, weight, and value.

4. Now it is time to come down from the mountain and return home. What parting words do you have for the mountain, and what is its reply?

Ready for what your answers reveal about you? Read on...

Key to Deep in the Mountains

The mountain that looms before you represents your father, or a father figure in your life. In psychological terms, it is a manifestation of the archetype of the “wise old man.? The stone you seek symbolizes abilities and strengths you must discover within yourself on your own journey to adult independence.

1. Your impression of the mountain show the image you have of your father. Was it difficult and unforgiving? Gentle and easily conquered? Or did you have an idealized image of a magnificent peak that somehow seemed to welcome you and encourage you in your quest?

2. The stone you are searching for represents your as yet undiscovered talent or strength. Your response to this question shows whether you will ever realize that untapped potential.

People who say they’d keep searching for the stone no matter what tend to show the same persistence and determination in their own lives, never giving up even when efforts seem fruitless.

Those who said they’d call it quits for the day but come back again to continue the search are the type who pace themselves, spreading their efforts over a long period of time. There are probably more than a few late bloomers in this group.

People who gave up looking for the stone altogether are in danger of never fulfilling their true potential.

3. The way you described the stone shows your feeling of self-worth. How big and heavy was it, and what did you think of its value?

“Oh, about twenty dollars or so.? Hmmm, that’s not much of an appraisal, is it?

“It turned out to be a huge diamond worth millions!? Hold on now, let’s not get carried away with ourselves.

4. Your parting words to the mountain reveal what you have always wanted, but never been able, to say to your father. Do you recognize any of these patters?

You: Thanks for everything.
Mountain: You take care of yourself.

Did you have that kind of ideal exchange? Or did it go more like this:

You: Well, it looks like I’m finally through with you.
Mountain: You can say that again!

Maybe it’s time you and your father sat down for a talk.

Posted by snackeru at 8:55 AM | Comments (2) | Stuff I wonder about

Category "Life"

Category "Stuff I wonder about"

October 11, 2005

If you want something you've got to ask for it

Calyx First of all, I just wanted to tell all of you that the bottom of an apple is called a "calyx." I learned this little tidbit while watching the news this morning, and I thought I would pass that information along. Now, the next time you are eating an apple, you can impress your friends and family with your new-found knowledge. No need to thank me.

Little Brown Jug Secondly, and more importantly, if you'll recall I said in my first post today that I was going to try to take some pictures of the Little Brown Jug. Well, let's just say that it is "mission accomplished" on that front. Not only did I get to take some pictures of the jug, I also got to hold the jug. I kid you not. I actually held the oldest, most important, most priceless travelling trophy in all of college football history.

Stay tuned for my story and my pictures of said event tomorrow. Needless to say, it was quite exciting for me.

Posted by snackeru at 12:58 PM | Comments (2) | Life | Stuff I wonder about

Category "Stuff I wonder about"

October 6, 2005

Long lost brothers?

His preciousRingPennies
His hairThinningThinning
Tortured byOrcsRich people making money
Will only be happy whenHe gets the Ring thereby assuring that Middle Earth will one day be ruled by Sauron.He waves goodbye to the Twins thereby assuring that one day we will spend 10 times more to get another team and build a stadium.
Talks to himself?YesProbably
Dwells inThe wretched bowels of the Misty MountainsThe wretched bowels of the Star Tribune
In order to achieve his goalsBit off a finger to get his precious ringWould chop off his nose to spite his face if it meant a couple more screeds against billionaire owners
Deserves to be shunned by society and cast into the wilderness only to survive by eating raw fish?YesYes

So, there you have it. If you can help me think of any other similarities by all means add your own.

Posted by snackeru at 12:44 PM | Comments (11) | Stuff I wonder about

Category "Stuff I wonder about"

September 27, 2005


This is yet another example of a pointless post. Just trying to get some thoughts down. You have been warned...

I am always amazed at the things I remember from college. Not necessarily the activities I was a part of, or the friends I made, but of the things I learned. For those of you who went to college, if you are anything like me every once in a while these memories of classes, professors' comments, course material and readings come creeping up in your consciousness when you least expect it. In fact, it surprises me to no end how often I will remember some little nugget of wisdom that struck me ... well ... over 10 years ago now.

Why does this happen? Why do these memories suddenly come to the surface? And lest you think I am troubled by these memories, this couldn't be further from the truth. I wouldn't trade my college years for anything and I am thrilled that memories like these catch me off guard every once in a while.

Today I was thinking about a class I took as a freshman called "Principia." Even now I still don't quite get what the point of the class was, but there are two very distinct memories I have of the class. One is a class period when the professor broke the class into male and female groups and then asked us to discuss whether or not we would ever want to be a member of the opposite sex, even if it was just for a day. Of the males in the class, not one said that they would ever want to see what it was like to be a woman. Not even for a day. Well over half the women wanted to see what it would be like to be a man.

The second memory I have of this class comes from a course reading. During this class we read excerpts from the works of the philosopher Epictetus. If you have never heard of Epictetus, that's OK. I had never heard of him either. But to this day, one of the passages from his works still strikes me as something so profoundly interesting that I can't shake it from my memory:

Whenever you grow attached to something, do not act as though it were one of those things that cannot be taken away, but as though it were something like a jar or a crystal goblet, so that when it breaks you will remember what it was like, and not be troubled. So also here; if you kiss your child, your brother, your friend, do not trust your impression in every particular, nor permit your exuberance to proceed as much as it wants, but hold it back, stop it, just like those who stand behind generals parading in triumph and remind them that they are human. So too remind yourself that you love a mortal, something not your own; it has been given to you for the present, not inseparably nor forever, but like a fig, or a bunch of grapes, at a fixed season of the year, and that if you yearn for it in the winter, you are a fool. If in this way you long for your son, or your friend, at a time when he has not been given to you, rest assured that you are yearning for a fig in winter. For as winter is to a fig, so is every state of affairs in relation to the things which are destroyed in accordance with that same state of affairs. (Disc. 3. 24. 84-7; cf. Ench. 3)

Essentially, if you like a jar say you like a jar for when it is broken it won't trouble you. And treat your relationships with the people you love in the same way. Focus on the fragility of all the things you love. Discipline yourself to anticipate the inevitabilty of mortality, the fact that nothing lasts forever. Epictetus called this discipline askesis.

The goal of the stoic, like Epictetus, is to control one's feelings and emotions so that they never subject the stoic to painful, or hurtful thoughts which usually rob a person of inner harmony, tranquility, and the abilty to think rationally.1

Anyway, that is what I was thinking about today. Why? I have no idea. But I remember being a freshman in college and thinking that this philosophy is about the stupidest thing I had ever read. In fact, it became a running joke between me and my friends. "Say you love that Coke, for when it is gone you will not be angry."

This is the kind of stuff I wonder about. I have a sneaky suspicion that other people have thoughts like this too, but just choose not to bore their blog readers with the details. Carry on with your business...

Posted by snackeru at 9:52 PM | Comments (3) | Stuff I wonder about

Category "Stuff I wonder about"

September 19, 2005

Superman's leaping ability

superman.jpg So, I was reading Wired magazine at lunch today, when I chanced upon an article about the physics of super-heroes. It seems a professor here at the U of M, James Kakalios, has written a book (The Physics of Superheroes) that discusses whether or not they obey the laws of nature. Nifty. Anyway, in the article they ask Kaklios about Superman's ability to "leap tall buildings in a single bound." Here is what he says:

Let's say a tall building is about on-eighth of a mile high -- his legs must exert about 6,000 pounds of force against the ground. Superman's muscles and skeleton are adapted to Krypton's gravity, which is much stronger than Earth's. If 6,000 pounds is about twice his weight on Krypton, and he weighs about 220 pounds on Earth, then the gravity on his home planet must be roughly 15 times greater than it is on ours.

How cool is that? Krypton has a gravity 15 times that of Earth's!!! See, that is why you read this blog, for important information like this. No need to thank me. Just go about your daily business. See you tomorrow!

Posted by snackeru at 4:19 PM | Comments (3) | Stuff I wonder about

Category "Stuff I wonder about"

April 14, 2005

Cola preferences

I find it strange that while I prefer Pepsi to Coke, and I like Pepsi Edge way more than C2, I vastly prefer Vanilla Coke over Pepsi Vanilla. Quite frankly, Pepsi Vanilla is disgusting.

The nectar of the gods, Vanilla Coke

Posted by snackeru at 12:48 PM | Comments (4) | Stuff I wonder about

Category "Stuff I wonder about"

March 22, 2005

Land Rovers


Why does the Land Rover have a sun roof for your luggage or groceries? I don't know about your luggage, but I don't think mine cares about having a sun roof. Because of this obvious attempt to make the luggage happier than the occupants in the backseat I will never buy a Land Rover. Yes, I will stick with buying used mini-vans with hopefully less than 100,000 miles. That is how disgusted I am with this.

Posted by snackeru at 12:44 PM | Comments (6) | Stuff I wonder about

Category "Stuff I wonder about"

March 18, 2005

Stuff I wonder about


Have you ever really looked at this logo? What exactly is this pig cooking? And why is he practically drooling over it? I love Famous Dave's, but I find this logo a little disturbing.

Posted by snackeru at 12:15 PM | Comments (2) | Stuff I wonder about

eXTReMe Tracker
View My Stats