Homepage
Music (down)
Design
| Wednesday, July 02, 2008 |
| Evil Doomsday Device #1: Strong Gun |
Here's an idea for any evil scientists out there. Invent a device that can negate the nuclear Strong Force. If they ever come up with anti-gravity, I figure it's an easy step to come up with anti-strong or anti-light (anti-electromagnetic) forces.
Of course, if you were to negate the Strong Force, any protons in the area will fly apart, effectively creating a (fission) nuclear explosion in proportion to the number of atoms in the area.
Most bombs get a small percentage of the pound-or-so of really heavy atoms to actually split (which is what causes the boom), so if you managed to get a 100% fission, my guess is that you'd get something like Nagasaki if you targeted an object too small to see with a microscope. You could probably erase L.A. if you eliminated the Strong Force in one of the nails in the Hollywood sign.
But I'm guessing, really, so I'm going to make some calls to some physicist friends to find out...Labels: doomsday, evil, guns, joke |
posted by Steve @ 1:26 PM  |
|
|
|
| Thursday, December 06, 2007 |
| Throw all the Women into Guantanamo |
I really try not to get riled up by things that are clearly meant to rile me.
I'm not very good at this, apparently, because when I read this, well, I felt compelled to respond:
"You know, liberalism is a greater threat to freedom, democracy and human rights than these detainees. Maybe we should consider a swap."
- Amy Proctor This is in response to a report on CNN, in which the reporter notes that in addition to the restrictions that the detainees had "no contact with the Red Cross or a chaplain, no books or mail, a Koran, but no prayer beads or cap," they also were occasionally rewarded with TP but prevented from handing it out to others.
"I think what's really notable about this is just the incredible petty cruelty and dehumanizing aspect of all of this. Detainees are punished for tearing a sheet or for very, very minor infractions."
-Jennifer Daskal, Human Rights Watch Amy's response to the was, "Oh, ye gads, the inhumanity."OK, that's the setup. Make up your own mind for a minute.
~~
Now here's what I have to say to Ms. Proctor:
1. Can you explain how people who are trying to be sure that the U.S. protects human rights are a threat to human rights?
2. As for swapping terrorists and liberals, Conservatism and Liberalism is a balance. Without the former, you have bloated government that can't balance a budget*; without the latter, we'd still have segregation and no women's suffrage - your opinion, as a woman's, wouldn't be valued if not for Loony Liberals. I couldn't even refer to you as "Ms." Proctor. So if throwing all the liberals into Guantanamo Bay Detention facility is feasible, well, why not throw in all the women, too, since they benefited so much from liberalism? We'd jail half the country either way.
In other words, your smearing brush is too wide; your rhetoric is absurdist.
3. I agree that, when caught, tried, and proven guilty, terrorists need to be tossed into a cell. But since those detainees in Guantanamo are rarely actually tried in a court, it's hard to say whether or not they're actually guilty. I personally think it would be AWESOME to see these people tried on public TV. I would watch with rapt attention. I would cheer when we proved, conclusively and transparently before the world, the guilt of those who are guilty and I would cheer just as much when someone who is innocent is proved innocent.
4. It's been known since the 1500's the torture isn't an effective means of interrogation. It's great for false confessions, because tortured people will tell you anything you want, especially if you threaten family. But when you're getting false confessions, and basing your entire nation's intelligence activities on false information, you are in much worse shape than if you hadn't tortured. I didn't come to this conclusion - people who interrogated for a living came to that conclusion:
That said, the sum total of my experience suggests the most effective means of conducting interrogations—and by effective, I mean achieving consistent success in obtaining accurate, comprehensive, and timely information—is through what has been frequently described as a “relationship-based” model. Let me emphasize that this is far more than just establishing rapport; it involves the pursuit of operational accord. Employing non-threatening principles of persuasion and enlightened cultural finesse, the interrogator seeks to establish a productive, nonadversarial relationship wherein the source perceives his interests to be best served by engaging cooperatively with the interrogator.
Since issues relating to coercion and torture continue to occupy centerstage in the public debate over this country’s interrogation policy, I feel compelled to briefly address this issue, especially as it relates to the question of effectiveness. I find it curious that in the debate involving the so-called “ticking bomb” scenario, there has been a pre-supposition that physical, psychological, and/or emotional coercion will compel a source to provide actionable intelligence, the only issues in contention being those legal and moral arguments in favor or in opposition. To the best of my knowledge, there is no definitive data to support that supposition and considerable historical evidence to suggest the contrary."
- Former USAF interrogator Steven M. Kleinman's Statement before the Senate 9/25/07; Emphasis mine
Feel free to discuss in a way that doesn't insult either one of our intellects.
*Of course, the only presidents in the last 50(!) years to balance the budget were Democrats: Johnson and Clinton.Labels: evil, idiots, politics, torture, war, women |
| posted by Steve @ 1:47 PM |
|
|
|
| Friday, January 13, 2006 |
| A Funny Thing Happened Today no. 6: Credit card companies = Satan's minions |
Further proof of the Diabolical nature of credit card companies:
Today, Rachel got an offer for a credit card. Fine, that happens daily. But I'm pretty sure this was the single worst offer I'd ever seen.
APR (Annual Percentage Rate): 23.99 r> Startup Fee: $50
Monthly (!) Fee: $10.95 ($131.40/yr)
Minimum Finance Charge: $0.50
So, let's say Rachel actually got this and bought one $0.50 popscicle every month for a year with it.
Startup Monthly fees = $181.40
Finance charges = $.50 x 12 = $6
Interest = ~$35
For twelve fifty-cent popscicles ($6 in merchandise), she'd pay about $222. Now, if you could excuse me, I'm going to go and visit the executives at Applied Card Bank, Wilmington DE. With a blunt object.
 | Currently listening :
Cowboy Bebop
By Yoko Kanno |
Labels: credit, evil, money |
| posted by Steve @ 4:45 PM |
|
|
|
|
| About Me |
|
Name: Steve
Home: Tucson, Arizona, United States
About Me:
See my complete profile
|
| Previous Post |
|
| Archives |
|
|
| Links |
|
Blogroll
|
|
