Alright, so here's something I don't get. Let's say you go out with a girl plus a bunch of friends. It's an exciting night. The music particularly good. Everyone is singing and dancing.
Why is it that the guy and his gal are sitting around, not doing the singing and dancing, but instead just hanging out and looking "content."
I don't like it. That kind of thing simply does not match my personality. If I'm going to a rocking bar with a lady friend, she'd damn well better want to sing and dance and rock the night away, hey!
Twistin... Twistin... twistin the night away...
But I digress. Perhaps there are a wide variety of types of people in the world. There had better be, because I refuse to go through some sort of stupid courting motions that mean I have to "be cool."
"Cool" is what I say it is.
Saturday, September 30, 2006
Tuesday, September 26, 2006
The Purpose of Science: An Answer
Alright, so I've given everyone a few days, gotten exactly zero answers, and will now simply post my approximation of the correct answers.
1. What is the purpose of science?
Ans: The purpose of science is very closely related to the toilet. 200 years ago, no one had one. Now, every single person in America has access to them.
That's it. That's the purpose of science. It's ultimate goal is to take the world around us, figure out how it works, and - more importantly - figure out how we might benefit from that understanding. More on this in a moment.
2. If one football team gets 1000 total yards and one gets zero, who wins?
Ans: Well, we don't exactly know. It's probably the team that gets 1000 yards. The reason we don't know is because winning isn't measured by yards. It's measured by points. Yards is just a nice way to guess. In this case, our guess is probably accurate, but it remains only a nice way to guess.
3. Why?
Ans: Here's where things get tricky. Why would it be the team that gets 1000 yards?
As far as I can tell, it's because that's what ALWAYS happens. If you flush a toilet in North America, it ALWAYS swirls counter-clockwise. If you clap your hands, you'll always hear a noise. If you eat food, you'll always be at least a little less hungry.
In every case, the act is not the same thing as what you are trying to make happen. Clapping your hands is not making a noise. Clapping your hands is doing something that WILL make a noise.
That's it. That's science. We are trying to guess VERY VERY VERY correctly. We are trying to be so right, that there's basically no way we can be wrong. In fact, maybe it's better to think of it that way, since that is how statistics people think about it....
We aren't trying to guess right. We're trying to guess NOT wrong. We're trying to be as least wrong as possible. We are doing everything in our power to cover our own asses. If someone thinks they have an answer, we do everything we can to prove that they are idiots.
THE END
So that's the answer. Now you know everything there is to know about science. Now comes the fun part. Let's use it.
So we know that yards in a game is a great way to guess who is going to win, because we can come up with questions that might make the people who make wrong guesses look like idiots.
Here's an example:
I guess that the team that gets zero yards will BEAT the team that gets 100,000 yards!
Clearly, this person is an idiot. So we know that measuring yards might be a good way to figure out who is not an idiot.
Now let's look at an example that can't make a person look like an idiot:
I guess that if I wish hard enough, my team will win!
Um... How do we prove, and I mean PROVE without a shadow of a doubt that this person is an idiot? We can't. If his team wins, he can say he wished hard enough. If his team loses, he can say he didn't wish hard enough. There's nothing to measure. There's no way to prove one way or the other.
So we know that wishing hard is bad science.
Now what if we look at something more current, especially here in sunny Kansas:
Evolution vs Creationism/"Intelligent design"
This should be fun. First, let's take Evolution:
I guess that, if you put a bunch of plants that sometimes bloom white and sometimes bloom purple near some bees that ONLY like to pollinate purple flowers, you'll end up with the same number of white and purple flowers!
Clearly, this person is a moron. Eventually, if the bees totally ignore the white flowers then we're going to be running out of white flowers. The plants that bloom purple more than white are going to get more attention paid to them. The plants that bloom white are going to be ignored, which means they aren't going to be having any baby plants that bloom white.
If you keep letting this happen, over and over and over again, then you'll probably end up with only purple flowers, or, at the very least, with more purple flowers than white flowers.
And so the idiot proves to be wrong, which means watching and counting traits (in this case colors) as they go from parent to child for years and years is a nice way to see what's going on. This time, it was a nice way to see what bees could do to different colored flowers.
That's basically what evolution is. Evolution guesses that animals and plants change, depending on how the world makes them change. If bees like purple flowers and bees are how flowers make babies, then there are going to be purple flowers. If animals are trying to eat deer, and the animals with the biggest claws eat deer the easiest and have the most babies, then there are going to be more animals with big claws.
As far as I can tell, Intelligent Design doesn't have a problem with anything I've said. The only question it asks is, "OK, so taking all of that into account, how did we go from being tiny bugs to smart, big people?"
To which I say: "GREAT QUESTION! Let's hear your guess!"
We got smarter, bigger, faster, (and with better eyesight and depth perception), because a greater being made us that way.
.... Um. K. I'm sorry, I'm a little confused. I want to make you look like an idiot, like I made the guy who guessed wrong about the bees and the flowers, but I don't see how to do that.
Oh. Um. Ok. Try this: Our eyes couldn't be as complex as they are without a greater being's help.
Neat. I am down with that! But wait! There's still no actual way to measure that. It's not that I don't believe you, Mr. Intelligent design guy, but you've given me no way to show that you are right or wrong. Which means, unless you can think of something quick, I'm going to have to label you as bad science.
Wait! I got it! We can sweep the ENTIRE universe! If we find the being or beings that made us who we are, then I'm right. If we don't, then I'm wrong!
Hm... Interesting. Ok. I'm up for it. Just one thing... How do we do that? Oh yeah. We can't.
Therein lies the rub. Something may not be admitted as science until it can be proven wrong. Intelligent Design cannot be proven wrong. Evolution can be (it just wasn't).
I realize that I'm taking a long time to get through this, so let's wrap it up by asking one last question.
Why this crazy, fanatical need to be able to prove something wrong?
Ans: Because if we can't prove it wrong, then we can't use it. Does God make the toilet flush, or does gravity? God may or may not, there is no way to measure it. But it is very easy to show whether gravity does or does not.
Which means we can use it.
And that is the purpose of science.
1. What is the purpose of science?
Ans: The purpose of science is very closely related to the toilet. 200 years ago, no one had one. Now, every single person in America has access to them.
That's it. That's the purpose of science. It's ultimate goal is to take the world around us, figure out how it works, and - more importantly - figure out how we might benefit from that understanding. More on this in a moment.
2. If one football team gets 1000 total yards and one gets zero, who wins?
Ans: Well, we don't exactly know. It's probably the team that gets 1000 yards. The reason we don't know is because winning isn't measured by yards. It's measured by points. Yards is just a nice way to guess. In this case, our guess is probably accurate, but it remains only a nice way to guess.
3. Why?
Ans: Here's where things get tricky. Why would it be the team that gets 1000 yards?
As far as I can tell, it's because that's what ALWAYS happens. If you flush a toilet in North America, it ALWAYS swirls counter-clockwise. If you clap your hands, you'll always hear a noise. If you eat food, you'll always be at least a little less hungry.
In every case, the act is not the same thing as what you are trying to make happen. Clapping your hands is not making a noise. Clapping your hands is doing something that WILL make a noise.
That's it. That's science. We are trying to guess VERY VERY VERY correctly. We are trying to be so right, that there's basically no way we can be wrong. In fact, maybe it's better to think of it that way, since that is how statistics people think about it....
We aren't trying to guess right. We're trying to guess NOT wrong. We're trying to be as least wrong as possible. We are doing everything in our power to cover our own asses. If someone thinks they have an answer, we do everything we can to prove that they are idiots.
THE END
So that's the answer. Now you know everything there is to know about science. Now comes the fun part. Let's use it.
So we know that yards in a game is a great way to guess who is going to win, because we can come up with questions that might make the people who make wrong guesses look like idiots.
Here's an example:
I guess that the team that gets zero yards will BEAT the team that gets 100,000 yards!
Clearly, this person is an idiot. So we know that measuring yards might be a good way to figure out who is not an idiot.
Now let's look at an example that can't make a person look like an idiot:
I guess that if I wish hard enough, my team will win!
Um... How do we prove, and I mean PROVE without a shadow of a doubt that this person is an idiot? We can't. If his team wins, he can say he wished hard enough. If his team loses, he can say he didn't wish hard enough. There's nothing to measure. There's no way to prove one way or the other.
So we know that wishing hard is bad science.
Now what if we look at something more current, especially here in sunny Kansas:
Evolution vs Creationism/"Intelligent design"
This should be fun. First, let's take Evolution:
I guess that, if you put a bunch of plants that sometimes bloom white and sometimes bloom purple near some bees that ONLY like to pollinate purple flowers, you'll end up with the same number of white and purple flowers!
Clearly, this person is a moron. Eventually, if the bees totally ignore the white flowers then we're going to be running out of white flowers. The plants that bloom purple more than white are going to get more attention paid to them. The plants that bloom white are going to be ignored, which means they aren't going to be having any baby plants that bloom white.
If you keep letting this happen, over and over and over again, then you'll probably end up with only purple flowers, or, at the very least, with more purple flowers than white flowers.
And so the idiot proves to be wrong, which means watching and counting traits (in this case colors) as they go from parent to child for years and years is a nice way to see what's going on. This time, it was a nice way to see what bees could do to different colored flowers.
That's basically what evolution is. Evolution guesses that animals and plants change, depending on how the world makes them change. If bees like purple flowers and bees are how flowers make babies, then there are going to be purple flowers. If animals are trying to eat deer, and the animals with the biggest claws eat deer the easiest and have the most babies, then there are going to be more animals with big claws.
As far as I can tell, Intelligent Design doesn't have a problem with anything I've said. The only question it asks is, "OK, so taking all of that into account, how did we go from being tiny bugs to smart, big people?"
To which I say: "GREAT QUESTION! Let's hear your guess!"
We got smarter, bigger, faster, (and with better eyesight and depth perception), because a greater being made us that way.
.... Um. K. I'm sorry, I'm a little confused. I want to make you look like an idiot, like I made the guy who guessed wrong about the bees and the flowers, but I don't see how to do that.
Oh. Um. Ok. Try this: Our eyes couldn't be as complex as they are without a greater being's help.
Neat. I am down with that! But wait! There's still no actual way to measure that. It's not that I don't believe you, Mr. Intelligent design guy, but you've given me no way to show that you are right or wrong. Which means, unless you can think of something quick, I'm going to have to label you as bad science.
Wait! I got it! We can sweep the ENTIRE universe! If we find the being or beings that made us who we are, then I'm right. If we don't, then I'm wrong!
Hm... Interesting. Ok. I'm up for it. Just one thing... How do we do that? Oh yeah. We can't.
Therein lies the rub. Something may not be admitted as science until it can be proven wrong. Intelligent Design cannot be proven wrong. Evolution can be (it just wasn't).
I realize that I'm taking a long time to get through this, so let's wrap it up by asking one last question.
Why this crazy, fanatical need to be able to prove something wrong?
Ans: Because if we can't prove it wrong, then we can't use it. Does God make the toilet flush, or does gravity? God may or may not, there is no way to measure it. But it is very easy to show whether gravity does or does not.
Which means we can use it.
And that is the purpose of science.
Friday, September 22, 2006
Science: 3 questions
I've decided to start a new series that has very little to do with getting babes and a whole lot to do with science. Specifically, I'd like to try to explain the basics of science that so many people simply don't know.
Mind you, I said "don't know" and not "don't get."
There's a big difference. I'm guessing that most anybody can figure out the basic workings of science, because we all USE the basic workings of science everyday. I once had a teacher who argued that everyone is a scientists, it's just that some people were stupid enough to pay for a fancy piece of paper that said so.
I'm planning on making this as easy and as obvious as possible. If there's something you don't get, you're probably thinking too hard.
That said, let's get going. Today, I'll start out REALLY simple. To totally understand science, you only need to know the answer to 3 questions. These are the three questions.
1. What is the purpose of science?
2. Which football team is going to win the game, if one team finishes the game with 1000 yards and the other team finishes the game with zero yards?
3. Concerning your answer to question number two.... Why?
So there you go. If you can answer those three questions, you'll be a master of science and the scientific method. In the comments section, I'm open to answers. Tomorrow, I'll do my best to explain the correct answers.
In the future, look for a talk about "empirical science," which is just a fancy way of saying "prove it, beeeotch." Also, learn why good scientists are the most conservative people on earth.
Mind you, I said "don't know" and not "don't get."
There's a big difference. I'm guessing that most anybody can figure out the basic workings of science, because we all USE the basic workings of science everyday. I once had a teacher who argued that everyone is a scientists, it's just that some people were stupid enough to pay for a fancy piece of paper that said so.
I'm planning on making this as easy and as obvious as possible. If there's something you don't get, you're probably thinking too hard.
That said, let's get going. Today, I'll start out REALLY simple. To totally understand science, you only need to know the answer to 3 questions. These are the three questions.
1. What is the purpose of science?
2. Which football team is going to win the game, if one team finishes the game with 1000 yards and the other team finishes the game with zero yards?
3. Concerning your answer to question number two.... Why?
So there you go. If you can answer those three questions, you'll be a master of science and the scientific method. In the comments section, I'm open to answers. Tomorrow, I'll do my best to explain the correct answers.
In the future, look for a talk about "empirical science," which is just a fancy way of saying "prove it, beeeotch." Also, learn why good scientists are the most conservative people on earth.
Tuesday, September 19, 2006
Labels
Hey everybody, if you haven't noticed, on the right side of the page is a link for "HTGBWET," which, as all of my most loyal readers know, is an acronym for "How To Get Babes Without Even Trying," but more accurately is a section of my blog in which I give mostly ridiculous tips for life, love, and, of course, getting babes without even trying.
Anyway, you'll notice that link. I've now joined a blogger beta thing (?), which, as far as I can tell, is only cool because it allows me to label posts under specific categories. Now, I can provide a link for my best posts, all my tips, my mailbag editions, and, my personal favorite, my rants on stupid sayings that neither make sense nor are even worth considering.
Anyway, in the next couple days expect my list of cool categories to grow, that the world might better know the man, the myth, the legend that is NJ Thomas.
Anyway, you'll notice that link. I've now joined a blogger beta thing (?), which, as far as I can tell, is only cool because it allows me to label posts under specific categories. Now, I can provide a link for my best posts, all my tips, my mailbag editions, and, my personal favorite, my rants on stupid sayings that neither make sense nor are even worth considering.
Anyway, in the next couple days expect my list of cool categories to grow, that the world might better know the man, the myth, the legend that is NJ Thomas.
Monday, September 18, 2006
Crazy Snake Guy
I have recently discovered that I can import my blog straight into facebook! So welcome all you schoolers, alcoholic schoolers, and college kids! Also everyone else on facebook!
So last week I decided not to write anything. Each of us has a way of showing respect, and that was my rather weak attempt. That said, let's make this week a good one, by kick-starting the adventure with a brand new HTGBWET!
HTGBWET #22,324: Give up and become the Crazy Snake Guy.
Yes, we've reached that point in my semesterly cycle of thoughts. I've once again determined that meeting and dating new people is just too much work. That being said, I've decided against getting all depressed about it this time and am choosing to look on the brighter side.
(Oh, yeah. You'll note the abnormally high number on this tip. This is because it is supposed to be the theoretically last or second to last one, in an ultimate sense. Don't worry, I'll still have quite a long while to fill in the numbers in between.)
Think of it. Here's a famous fairy tale.
Once upon a time, a guy asked a girl, "Will you marry me?" The girl said no and lived happily ever after, and went shopping, drank martinis, always had a clean house, never had to cook, stayed skinny, and was never farted on.
The End.
Obviously, this is a stupid story for stupid girls with stupid cooties, but I imagine it can be adapted for our purposes.
Once upon a time a guy got fed up with having to deal with all the girls who instantly went for the muscle guys or the tall, skinny guys and chose to get a cool snake that scared kids. His house was always messy, but this was ok because people were afraid of his snake. Kids never bothered him, and he grew up to be a creepy old man who yelled at pedestrians. Also, he lived happily ever after, until he died. Also, his snake ate him and then took over the world.
The End.
See? Sounds pretty sweet, huh? I mean, there's a guy that people've heard of! Crazy Snake Guy!
Oh, also, it turns out that I will be in Traffic Court, which could be pretty fun.
So last week I decided not to write anything. Each of us has a way of showing respect, and that was my rather weak attempt. That said, let's make this week a good one, by kick-starting the adventure with a brand new HTGBWET!
HTGBWET #22,324: Give up and become the Crazy Snake Guy.
Yes, we've reached that point in my semesterly cycle of thoughts. I've once again determined that meeting and dating new people is just too much work. That being said, I've decided against getting all depressed about it this time and am choosing to look on the brighter side.
(Oh, yeah. You'll note the abnormally high number on this tip. This is because it is supposed to be the theoretically last or second to last one, in an ultimate sense. Don't worry, I'll still have quite a long while to fill in the numbers in between.)
Think of it. Here's a famous fairy tale.
Once upon a time, a guy asked a girl, "Will you marry me?" The girl said no and lived happily ever after, and went shopping, drank martinis, always had a clean house, never had to cook, stayed skinny, and was never farted on.
The End.
Obviously, this is a stupid story for stupid girls with stupid cooties, but I imagine it can be adapted for our purposes.
Once upon a time a guy got fed up with having to deal with all the girls who instantly went for the muscle guys or the tall, skinny guys and chose to get a cool snake that scared kids. His house was always messy, but this was ok because people were afraid of his snake. Kids never bothered him, and he grew up to be a creepy old man who yelled at pedestrians. Also, he lived happily ever after, until he died. Also, his snake ate him and then took over the world.
The End.
See? Sounds pretty sweet, huh? I mean, there's a guy that people've heard of! Crazy Snake Guy!
Oh, also, it turns out that I will be in Traffic Court, which could be pretty fun.
Saturday, September 09, 2006
Google search!
Alright, everyone, I have awesome news! My rant about how much Jim Rome sucks is the NUMBER ONE result if you google "jim rome getting tackled."
That's right. Who's the man? Correct: someone other than Jim Rome.
That's right. Who's the man? Correct: someone other than Jim Rome.
Tuesday, September 05, 2006
Winning is for losers
So about that thing. Actually, about this other thing. I went to the first meeting of the International Law Society last thursday, curious to know what that was all about. After a bit of discussion concerning Moot Court (more on that later), the ILS people talked about the organization and its history. They mentioned all the neat things they did, like all the time they spent working for international law firms in Argentina, where the women are like flowers and the flowers are like salsa dancers.
Yadda yadda yadda. Bunch of nifty crap.
Then they pointed out that they were only 3. That's right. The officers included two co-presidents and a treasurer, but they lacked a secretary! Oh no!
Luckily for everyone involved, they had discussed amongst themselves for many long nights the proper way to dissolve the organization, when one brilliant soul suggested that they simply elect a secretary, you know, from among the 1Ls.
Somehow, the whole thing seemed staged.
Anyway, they asked for volunteers, and I raised my hands, figuring it to be a nice way to get involved and start the resume fodder, all at once. Little did I know that I was about to face the worlds number one ringer for international law society secretary positions.
The friendly co-pres noted my raised hand and said, "OK. Anybody else?"
pause.... pause... pause...
Wait. There. A hand in the back.
"Oh good," said the co-pres. "How 'bout both of you give a short speech, explaining why you would make a good secretary for ILS." The pres gestures at me to begin.
It is at this point that I think two things. First, "Huh?" Second, "Wait a sec. Let's revisit that other raised hand."
I looked to see who had volunteered and the blood froze in my veins (or something like that). I was up against a girl (diversity) who was clearly of foreign dissent (diversity) who was wearing some sort of Arab headcovering (DIVERSITY!!!).
Oh, I thought. Interesting.
Back to the subject at hand. "Um, well, I'm glad I've had so much time to think and prepare before giving this speech," I say, to lighten the suddenly congested room. I may have heard a nervous chuckle. That nervous chuckle may have come from my own throat. Time to move on.
"Well," I say, "As you said when describing the position, the secretary's job is to help organize and schedule and keep track of events..." Oh Crap! I am infamously bad at doing all of those things! Quick! Tiptoe around the issue!
"Well, ever since I began college I've enjoyed doing all of that. I'm a big believer in getting everyone together and promoting..." blah blah blah! Nathan, you're losing them! How can you be losing them, when you never had them to begin with? Oh my God!
Imagine the lamest conclusion you've ever heard. Now assume it's about the international law society and we'll call that my finale.
"Alright," said the other co-president. "And now if you'd like to talk?" He gestured at the woman who had raised her hand (who was also attractive, upon second glance).
"Yes," says she, "I feel I should be part of the international law society, because I am an international student" - ouch - "who plans on making ILS the majority of my extracurricular activity." - double ouch - "I feel qualified for the position as I spent all four years of my undergraduate years as president of the international student organization" - holy crap ouch! - "and I really believe that I can help all of the students better reach their goals to join the international organization."
Crap. So who do I vote for? Her or myself? WAit! What are you thinking? You are a freaking nominee!
Yeah, but she makes such a strong argument!
Needless to say, I lost the vote. Also, I am not going to be part of any law school committee, nor will I be a part of traffic court, because I spent so much time at ILS that I missed the traffic court meeting. And, just to round out matters, I lost all of my racquetball games last week.
And that was just thursday!
Yadda yadda yadda. Bunch of nifty crap.
Then they pointed out that they were only 3. That's right. The officers included two co-presidents and a treasurer, but they lacked a secretary! Oh no!
Luckily for everyone involved, they had discussed amongst themselves for many long nights the proper way to dissolve the organization, when one brilliant soul suggested that they simply elect a secretary, you know, from among the 1Ls.
Somehow, the whole thing seemed staged.
Anyway, they asked for volunteers, and I raised my hands, figuring it to be a nice way to get involved and start the resume fodder, all at once. Little did I know that I was about to face the worlds number one ringer for international law society secretary positions.
The friendly co-pres noted my raised hand and said, "OK. Anybody else?"
pause.... pause... pause...
Wait. There. A hand in the back.
"Oh good," said the co-pres. "How 'bout both of you give a short speech, explaining why you would make a good secretary for ILS." The pres gestures at me to begin.
It is at this point that I think two things. First, "Huh?" Second, "Wait a sec. Let's revisit that other raised hand."
I looked to see who had volunteered and the blood froze in my veins (or something like that). I was up against a girl (diversity) who was clearly of foreign dissent (diversity) who was wearing some sort of Arab headcovering (DIVERSITY!!!).
Oh, I thought. Interesting.
Back to the subject at hand. "Um, well, I'm glad I've had so much time to think and prepare before giving this speech," I say, to lighten the suddenly congested room. I may have heard a nervous chuckle. That nervous chuckle may have come from my own throat. Time to move on.
"Well," I say, "As you said when describing the position, the secretary's job is to help organize and schedule and keep track of events..." Oh Crap! I am infamously bad at doing all of those things! Quick! Tiptoe around the issue!
"Well, ever since I began college I've enjoyed doing all of that. I'm a big believer in getting everyone together and promoting..." blah blah blah! Nathan, you're losing them! How can you be losing them, when you never had them to begin with? Oh my God!
Imagine the lamest conclusion you've ever heard. Now assume it's about the international law society and we'll call that my finale.
"Alright," said the other co-president. "And now if you'd like to talk?" He gestured at the woman who had raised her hand (who was also attractive, upon second glance).
"Yes," says she, "I feel I should be part of the international law society, because I am an international student" - ouch - "who plans on making ILS the majority of my extracurricular activity." - double ouch - "I feel qualified for the position as I spent all four years of my undergraduate years as president of the international student organization" - holy crap ouch! - "and I really believe that I can help all of the students better reach their goals to join the international organization."
Crap. So who do I vote for? Her or myself? WAit! What are you thinking? You are a freaking nominee!
Yeah, but she makes such a strong argument!
Needless to say, I lost the vote. Also, I am not going to be part of any law school committee, nor will I be a part of traffic court, because I spent so much time at ILS that I missed the traffic court meeting. And, just to round out matters, I lost all of my racquetball games last week.
And that was just thursday!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)