Allow me clarify one thing before I begin. I am by neither a Denver Broncos fan nor a Peyton Manning fan.
That said, I am watching the Sunday night game on October 20, 2013 as I type this. Given the totally once sided, piss poor "selectively attentive" officiating in the Broncos vs Colts game, in which Oliver Luck's son Andrew is playing, I was compelled to see just how much money daddy had to throw around to the officials.
There's PLENTY...way more than plenty. Millions upon millions upon multiple millions more than plenty.
We used to have a joke in our household for every time the Packers (my home team) played in Dallas. Inevitably when the Packers would have a truly outstanding play, some flag would come flying out of ...nowhere near the action. We'd call it the "illegal doing well by the Packers" flag. They were always obscure procedural penalties or outright wrong calls such as extremely questionable holding calls nowhere near the actual play.
Everyone knows some minor holding happens on literally every play in professional football, so that's the standby for the paid off official, and a dead give away when called repeatedly on only one side of the ball on a team usually known for clean play. This is usually compounded by completely BLATANT holds, pass interference, etc. being magically invisible to the eyes of the "men" in the black and white stripes...with, as I said, the very selective eyesight.
The net effect of this, over time, is in addition to adding several more men to the field for one team, to be very deflating to the other team. Denver may be many things, but they're not a "dirty team" and the number of penalties called against them in this game is beyond excessive. It calls into question the very structure of the NFL, and the officiating specifically. I used to think I was simply biased, but no. I have "no dog in this hunt" at all, but clearly the outcome of this game was planned well in advance, leaving the integrity and reality of the NFL about equal to that of the WWF.
I'm glad I was able to enjoy REAL football for a few decades anyway.
That the officials in the NFL are bought and paid for is without question. That they disrespect fans SO MUCH that they're willing to be so open about it on such a high viewership game, is disgusting and makes me want to stop watching football all together. At this point I'd really rather watch WWF. At least I don't have to listen to Collinsworth droning on and on and on and on and on... Isn't it time for him to RETIRE or something?
Nothing is more disheartening than the call in which the Colts excessively celebrated sacking Manning then the penalty was called on DENVER...for, of course....holding. And NOW they call interference...on Denver's OFFENSE. Somewhere Vince Lombardi is, like me, shaking his head in complete disgust.
It really is a shame Oliver Luck doesn't have more faith in his son's ability to win the game fairly.
P.S. That was a touchdown at the end of the 3rd quarter. Denver should have challenged...but with that crew I can see why they didn't.
Brilliant Bitch
Intentionally provocative commentary on everything from world events to Mom's apple pie--which she was too busy "being herself" to make. Meow.
Translate
Sunday, October 20, 2013
Saturday, June 29, 2013
PETA Has Lost It!
Normally I have a tendency to side with just about any animal rights advocates and have been a PETA supporter for years. I purchase free range/cruelty free meats and eggs when I eat meat at all, and I tend strongly toward an unofficial vegan diet. That is a bit difficult given what Monsanto has done to corn, wheat and soy, but that's another issue entirely.
The only true exception to that is my obsession with Argentinian beef. Oh baby! Charred on the outside and mooing in the middle--preferably served at Cambalache Restaurant, the one true fine dining restaurant in Cancun, Mexico, where the Ceasar dressing is whipped up fresh at table-side and spread, leaf by leaf on greens so fresh they still smell of the ocean air. The atmosphere is casual elegance with fine crystal, real linen table cloths and servers who know how to deliver professional wine service from a decent list. And I have wandered completely off topic.
Animal rights. I believe strongly in them. I have rescued a number of cats. Dogs are more difficult for me, as I am not able to provide the level commitment dogs require for true happiness. (They are so much more needy than cats!) If you cannot spend at least an hour a day walking your dog, do not have a dog. It's that simple. Some days I cannot do that, so I don't have a dog. I also don't like the pathogens they bring into the house that could sicken my strictly indoor only cat (they live up to a decade longer indoors only) so dogs are a no-go for me. I don't go to breeders, but have always rescued my pets, spayed and neutered them. I adopted my brother's cats when he died rather than seeing them go to a shelter.
I also admire Pamela Sue Anderson Lee Anderson Lee Anderson. I think there's another name or two in there somewhere too, but I don't know how many of them she married or didn't, so I'll stick with Anderson, and as I said I share her support of PETA. I was disgusted by the conditions of the "Colonel Sanders chickens" when that all came to light and first contributed to the cause then. I don't wear fur, though I do have a weakness for Louis Vuitton leather goods. As I see it, those animals have already been killed for meat anyway.
I was checking out the PETA blog when I saw a little sideline that said:
Having seen the trailer, I thought ohhh no, this is going to be really bad. Some of that horse action was really intense. I wonder how many horses died. It must have been quite of few...
THIS is an exact copy of the blog entry:
*******************************************************************************************************
Read This Before You Go See 'The Lone Ranger'
Written by Alisa Mullins
06-27-2013
As a huge Johnny Depp fan, I was initially pretty excited about the opening of The Lone Ranger next weekend. But since I also care about horses, I'm going to have to pass on the "Who was that masked man?" reboot. That's because the movie contains several scenes that put horses in danger.
© StarMaxInc.com
During filming, a horse almost drowned after being forced to swim across the rain-swollen Colorado River and being swept downstream. The horse was saved only because a production crew was in a pontoon boat downriver and someone was able to throw a lasso around the animal's head and pull the horse ashore.
Making a movie with horses can be dangerous for humans, too. During the filming of another scene, Depp fell off his horse and was trampled.
Horses hold the depressing distinction of being the animal most frequently injured or killed on TV and movie sets. As a recent example, you may remember that the horse racing–themed TV show Luck was canceled after three horses died during the first season alone.
Horses' high casualty rate is attributable to several factors. While horses are domesticated and therefore more easily trained than exotic animals, many people involved in the film industry are unfamiliar with their behavior and needs and therefore make demands on them that are stressful, uncomfortable, and downright dangerous. Horses are also prey animals who are easily frightened and have a high flight instinct—and when they flee, they can seriously hurt themselves. Some horse trainers are inexperienced and/or abusive, and even reputable trainers know that they may be putting their jobs on the line if they resist when asked to put horses at risk. In fact, one trainer was fired from The Lone Ranger production for refusing to shoot potentially dangerous scenes.
What You Can Do
If a movie contains scenes with horses, hi-ho, Silver, stay away! Instead, stick with films that use sophisticated computer-generated imagery, which weaves a story without harming a hair on an animal's head.
- MORE SHARING SERVICES
*********************************************************************************
So, this huge tragedy that should make everyone stay away from the film is that zero horses were hurt or killed.
PETA blog then went on to talk about some television show (Luck) that was canceled because some horses were killed. What does that have to do with Johnny Depp or the Lone Ranger?
So, being me, I did some research on how the horse stunts were filmed. This is what I found out.
The filming did include a horse swimming across a river and it did begin to drift out of frame. A pontoon boat was there for the purposes of wrangling. The animal was controlled without incident or injury to horse or human. As for Johnny Depp being "trampled"...PETA blog forgot one word--ALMOST.
The link below shows clips of how difficult some of the stunts were and the story discusses how Depp was ALMOST trampled during filming. Let me say that one more time. ALMOST.
This is personally offensive to me too because I know "horse people" and no one cares more about horses--no one gives more in talent and money to causes like saving the wild mustangs and humane treatment of horses, such as caring for retired and injured race horses and other horse related issues than they do! They're borderline freaky about it. Many of them care more about their horses than they do their own children, and that is no hyperbole! So on this issue PETA is just plain wrong...especially in targeting someone like Johnny Depp who has always been so conscientious.
PETA would have a film people worked very hard to make authentic dragged through the mud for no legitimate reason--in hopes of getting some cheap publicity. That makes me distrust the organization as a whole. I can tell you they will absolutely never receive another dime from me. Once someone lies to me I'm done with them; it's that simple. A mistake I can understand, but multiple outright lies--no way will I tolerate that. From now on I'll do my donating locally. I suggest you do the same.
Monday, March 18, 2013
Spring and Game of Thrones
I have updated my look for spring in the northern hemisphere, so my apologies to those who do not like green. After many long months of white snow and grey slush I must admit I'm very much looking forward to it. Like spring in my chilly little corner of the universe, this look won't last long, so take heart and please indulge my temporal twitterpation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8WuDIcNE-o
Spring is not the only thing I'm excited about these days. I'm also looking forward to Game of Thrones returning on HBO! I'm well into my second reading of the books which are FAR superior to the HBO series, which is admittedly remarkably well done...which is why I'm so looking forward its return, obviously.
I don't quite understand how the HBO version manages to be both SO right and SOOOOOOooo wrong.
Take my major gripe, the casting.
So many of the characters look not just years, but decades older than they are in George R. R. Martin's High Fantasy Series A Song of Ice and Fire. I am a feminist to my core and despise ageism, but the person they chose for the role of Catelyn Stark is just presposterous! In the books she is in her mid thirties, and no amount of makeup or lighting is ever going to make her look as good as the original actress chosen to play the role, Jennifer Ehle, who is not only the correct age (well south of fifty) but looks like the....uh...the ahhh....female human chosen to play her daughter, Sansa. Compare the pictures here if you will:
It really is unreal to me that there are only five years between Jennifer and Michelle, but I have read that Michelle is a major fitness freak and runner. That is very taxing on the body when taken to extremes and gives a person, male or female, a wasted look similar to that of a hard core drug user, which makes sense because people who exercise at that level are chasing an endorphin high.
It is a true shame that Ms. Ehle's film career blew up at this particular time because I find Michelle Fairley in the role of Catelyn Stark a non-stop distraction from the story. It angers me that the producers are so willing to subject the readers of the series to the unnecessary insult of passing a very poorly aging fifty year old woman off as someone in her early to mid thirties. Surely someone more appropriate was available, and it's not like HBO has been shorting them on the budget for this series.
***To those who have loved Michelle Fairley or anyone else in other (more appropriate) roles, my apologies. I do not doubt their acting ability, just their suitability for THIS one.***
Thankfully Lysa, Catelyn's supposedly younger sister, is a minor character we don't see often, because she is positively haggard and witch-like in appearance, and far from a lovely young woman forced to wed a man twenty years older than her own father then prematurely died and left her a widow with a young son still at breast. The image of this old crone breast feeding is horrible to see but what is completely ludicrous is the idea that her husband who was at least 45-50 years older than her (she being the baby of the family) died prematurely! Who dies prematurely at 90+ years old? The math just does not hold up. Whoever had the final say on this bit of casting idiocy should have taken some time to READ THE BOOKS!
Then there's Sansa, who I didn't like in the books and like even less now that I know more about Sophie Turner, the female person who occupies her role in the HBO serie. If I had a daughter that person represents everything I would advise my daughter not to be. It is truly a sad day when someone defines their existence--their worthiness of a place in the world by whether or not their ass looks better than that of a Kardashian--the most useless beings on this planet. In a way I suppose it was perfect casting because they both determine their value and worth based upon how prettily they can pose and dress (or in Sophie's case, UNdress) themselves for the pleasure of others. When you make an attempt to delve any deeper there's...empty space.
They are both the very definition of the word vacuous. Just for "funsies" I'll share several pics here and allow you to judge for yourselves. First, Sansa as she appears on HBO, then several shots of Sophie Turner before and after the debut of Game of Thrones.
See what I mean about the nose?
Who did they get right? Arya! She's perfect! She's exactly as I pictured her, though prettier. George R. R. Martin (here to fore to be known as GRRM) has a fondness for ugly heroes in all his books, perhaps because he sees himself as ugly? I don't know. If I started psychoanalyzing him I'd be here for days not just hours. HBO really got Arya right, and Maisie Williams is just brilliant! She's believable and endearing and human and I just love her!
I think they did well with Daenerys and Viserys Targaryen, and Melisandre is perfect as well. Just the right mix of age and experience and sex appeal. (I loved my hair that color...it just oozes power and sex, but it was too high maintenance for a natural blonde who is decidedly not high maintenance.) I am not fond of the person they chose to play the Reed girl, but Jojen's character more than makes up for it, so that makes up for it, and she may be able to act her way out of the fact that she doesn't look right for the part to me.
Another one they really blew it on was the handsome Peter Dinklage in the role of Tyrion Lannister. While he is sublime in his acting ability, he is supposed to be hideously ugly, not handsome and charming! Again, it's distracting, but at at least in a pleasant way. Aidan Gillen as "Littlefinger" is almost too perfect for words, as is Kit Harrington as Jon Snow. Here's one for you, ladies,
As for the alleged "golden beauties" of the series, they both leave me cold. The actors are handsome enough, but Cersei and the Kingslayer they are not. While they do have strong facial structure, they hardly look like "golden" anything. They could have at least colored their hair or worn truly blonde hair pieces for the role. They are golden lions, not greasy dishwater tarnished gargoyles..and would it have killed them to give Cersei some curves? Not everyone watching Game of Thrones is a gay producer, director or casting agent who loves breastless women or plastic Barbies as over-compensation. Real men and women prefer something substantial, which the Lannisters ARE, and both Lena Headey and .Nikolaj Coster-Waldau are more than capable or portraying. That one falls on hair, makeup and wardrobe. Which brings us to the most grievous insult of all, Renly Baratheon.
Language warning:
WHAT THE FUCK? Are you fucking kidding me?
Renly Baratheon is supposed to be a young Robert, tall, broad of shoulder and strong, with long flowing black hair, not some trimmed and perfumed foppish little mannequin-man you'd pick up at the post-show cocktail party during fashion week! I think the audience would have caught on to the gay romance thing without the gigantic plot hole created by the fact that Renly looks no more Baratheon (strong of build, black of hair) than Joffrey! They made a huge plot/continuity mess, really a fatal error for anyone even minimally familiar with the books, with that one. They could have at least given the guy black hair rather than keeping him nearly as fair as his lover. Stop underestimating the audience. We are perfectly capable of understanding nuance. Every gay character doesn't have to prance about with flopping wrists, pubic hair on his face and a lisp! Not all gay men are flamboyant gay men, and Renly was only whispered about while Loras was the one people feared too much for his battle prowess to taunt in public.
I really detest when that much license is taken with someone else's work just so that whoever is producing or directing can work out his own personal issues, whatever they may be. As a viewer it's distracting and annoying and really takes away from the quality of the finished product.
Speaking of taking too much license, I cannot believe the Bloody Mummers are not going to be included, at all and that the Reeds were introduced so late into the series as such minor characters when we were forced to suffer through so that of Theon and the Greyjoys in general. Nothing should have been written out but if it had to be done it should have been the whole Greyjoy clan and they joyless existence. Their dreary home, stupid squabbling, Theon and his ugly sister are all completely forgettable. What is dead shall never die. Tie an anchor around your ankles and jump in the ocean, the whole lot of you, and we shall see.
Here's hoping the coming season has some pleasant surprises, and better hair and makeup.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8WuDIcNE-o
Spring is not the only thing I'm excited about these days. I'm also looking forward to Game of Thrones returning on HBO! I'm well into my second reading of the books which are FAR superior to the HBO series, which is admittedly remarkably well done...which is why I'm so looking forward its return, obviously.
I don't quite understand how the HBO version manages to be both SO right and SOOOOOOooo wrong.
Take my major gripe, the casting.
So many of the characters look not just years, but decades older than they are in George R. R. Martin's High Fantasy Series A Song of Ice and Fire. I am a feminist to my core and despise ageism, but the person they chose for the role of Catelyn Stark is just presposterous! In the books she is in her mid thirties, and no amount of makeup or lighting is ever going to make her look as good as the original actress chosen to play the role, Jennifer Ehle, who is not only the correct age (well south of fifty) but looks like the....uh...the ahhh....female human chosen to play her daughter, Sansa. Compare the pictures here if you will:
Jennifer Ehle (1969- ) Who played Catelyn Stark in the pilot |
Michelle Fairley (1964- ) |
It really is unreal to me that there are only five years between Jennifer and Michelle, but I have read that Michelle is a major fitness freak and runner. That is very taxing on the body when taken to extremes and gives a person, male or female, a wasted look similar to that of a hard core drug user, which makes sense because people who exercise at that level are chasing an endorphin high.
It is a true shame that Ms. Ehle's film career blew up at this particular time because I find Michelle Fairley in the role of Catelyn Stark a non-stop distraction from the story. It angers me that the producers are so willing to subject the readers of the series to the unnecessary insult of passing a very poorly aging fifty year old woman off as someone in her early to mid thirties. Surely someone more appropriate was available, and it's not like HBO has been shorting them on the budget for this series.
***To those who have loved Michelle Fairley or anyone else in other (more appropriate) roles, my apologies. I do not doubt their acting ability, just their suitability for THIS one.***
Kate Dickie as Lysa Tully Aaron |
Clearly that is a prosthetic (fake) breast or it would be child abuse! |
Then there's Sansa, who I didn't like in the books and like even less now that I know more about Sophie Turner, the female person who occupies her role in the HBO serie. If I had a daughter that person represents everything I would advise my daughter not to be. It is truly a sad day when someone defines their existence--their worthiness of a place in the world by whether or not their ass looks better than that of a Kardashian--the most useless beings on this planet. In a way I suppose it was perfect casting because they both determine their value and worth based upon how prettily they can pose and dress (or in Sophie's case, UNdress) themselves for the pleasure of others. When you make an attempt to delve any deeper there's...empty space.
They are both the very definition of the word vacuous. Just for "funsies" I'll share several pics here and allow you to judge for yourselves. First, Sansa as she appears on HBO, then several shots of Sophie Turner before and after the debut of Game of Thrones.
Sophie Turner as Sansa Stark, lovely and natural...and clearly in a pout about it. |
Sophie Turner in her preferred state..excessively "enhanced" and bleached. Whoever looked at THIS and thought "Sansa Stark" was truly....uh....visionary, but ultimately correct...once the "enhancements", bleach, and even Botox, lip injections and facial fillers (at such a young age!) and layers of goo were laboriously removed ...over what had to have been a period of many months. For the record honey...that ass is already starting to slide down the back of your legs. NOT a pic I would have put up for the world to see...that right cheek is getting pretty matronly toward the bottom, but then you're not shy about nipping and tucking are ya... Meowwwww.... |
And I thought Nicole Kidman was the most talentless, plastic skank ever to _uck her way from Australia to Hollywood. Silly me! (Time for a Botox refresher--your face is showing expression...and note how tiny her nose is here compared to when she plays Sansa. That's more than a good contouring job. She gave up a lot of "Barbie" to get that role. |
The following is a link to a plastic surgery site in which surgeons discuss procedures done on stars: http://news.makemeheal.com/celebrity-plastic-surgery/sophie-turner-plastic-surgery/1498 ...but they forgot the obvious dental work/appliance. |
Miss Sophie forced to look more Sansa-like, but finding a way to express her inner sleaze despite the dress code. Has she had her implants downsized or is she just using a high tech minimizer bra and cammo black? My guess is they are the kind of implants that can be inflated and deflated to some degree via syringe. It would be the wise choice for someone seeking fame and fortune as a *cough* actor *cough*. |
Ahhh, what have we here? Sophie sans boobs and 'tude (deflated or gone we do not know I guess, on either count) and my favorite young female character in print and on screen, Arya, played by fifteen year old Maisie Williams... ...who can ACT! |
Have fun, but remember you don't have to be Barbie to be attractive! |
Who did they get right? Arya! She's perfect! She's exactly as I pictured her, though prettier. George R. R. Martin (here to fore to be known as GRRM) has a fondness for ugly heroes in all his books, perhaps because he sees himself as ugly? I don't know. If I started psychoanalyzing him I'd be here for days not just hours. HBO really got Arya right, and Maisie Williams is just brilliant! She's believable and endearing and human and I just love her!
I think they did well with Daenerys and Viserys Targaryen, and Melisandre is perfect as well. Just the right mix of age and experience and sex appeal. (I loved my hair that color...it just oozes power and sex, but it was too high maintenance for a natural blonde who is decidedly not high maintenance.) I am not fond of the person they chose to play the Reed girl, but Jojen's character more than makes up for it, so that makes up for it, and she may be able to act her way out of the fact that she doesn't look right for the part to me.
Another one they really blew it on was the handsome Peter Dinklage in the role of Tyrion Lannister. While he is sublime in his acting ability, he is supposed to be hideously ugly, not handsome and charming! Again, it's distracting, but at at least in a pleasant way. Aidan Gillen as "Littlefinger" is almost too perfect for words, as is Kit Harrington as Jon Snow. Here's one for you, ladies,
Swoon... Now those are eyes a person could dive into and never come up for air again. He's almost too perfect, but I'll manage to live with it. Unholy hotness! That hair! |
As for the alleged "golden beauties" of the series, they both leave me cold. The actors are handsome enough, but Cersei and the Kingslayer they are not. While they do have strong facial structure, they hardly look like "golden" anything. They could have at least colored their hair or worn truly blonde hair pieces for the role. They are golden lions, not greasy dishwater tarnished gargoyles..and would it have killed them to give Cersei some curves? Not everyone watching Game of Thrones is a gay producer, director or casting agent who loves breastless women or plastic Barbies as over-compensation. Real men and women prefer something substantial, which the Lannisters ARE, and both Lena Headey and .Nikolaj Coster-Waldau are more than capable or portraying. That one falls on hair, makeup and wardrobe. Which brings us to the most grievous insult of all, Renly Baratheon.
Language warning:
WHAT THE FUCK? Are you fucking kidding me?
Renly Baratheon is supposed to be a young Robert, tall, broad of shoulder and strong, with long flowing black hair, not some trimmed and perfumed foppish little mannequin-man you'd pick up at the post-show cocktail party during fashion week! I think the audience would have caught on to the gay romance thing without the gigantic plot hole created by the fact that Renly looks no more Baratheon (strong of build, black of hair) than Joffrey! They made a huge plot/continuity mess, really a fatal error for anyone even minimally familiar with the books, with that one. They could have at least given the guy black hair rather than keeping him nearly as fair as his lover. Stop underestimating the audience. We are perfectly capable of understanding nuance. Every gay character doesn't have to prance about with flopping wrists, pubic hair on his face and a lisp! Not all gay men are flamboyant gay men, and Renly was only whispered about while Loras was the one people feared too much for his battle prowess to taunt in public.
I really detest when that much license is taken with someone else's work just so that whoever is producing or directing can work out his own personal issues, whatever they may be. As a viewer it's distracting and annoying and really takes away from the quality of the finished product.
Speaking of taking too much license, I cannot believe the Bloody Mummers are not going to be included, at all and that the Reeds were introduced so late into the series as such minor characters when we were forced to suffer through so that of Theon and the Greyjoys in general. Nothing should have been written out but if it had to be done it should have been the whole Greyjoy clan and they joyless existence. Their dreary home, stupid squabbling, Theon and his ugly sister are all completely forgettable. What is dead shall never die. Tie an anchor around your ankles and jump in the ocean, the whole lot of you, and we shall see.
Here's hoping the coming season has some pleasant surprises, and better hair and makeup.
Wednesday, March 6, 2013
Charity Grifters
I was feeling a bit homesick for Kentucky after finding out my ex cut off the tip off his "wedding finger" in an unlikely for anyone but him...
"...slipped 'n fell 'n trahhd t' catch m' balance on the truck door an'it done closed on mah damn finger 'n cut the tip clean off! So ah super-glued it back on lahhk they did at the hoss-spittal back when ah had that ax-cident up 'ere at the fac'try an' it got t' smellin' so rank under that dressin' an' ahh woke you up bah puttin' mah finger up 'ere under yer nose an' you jus' 'bout drah heaved when y'saw what it was..." *long pause for what sounds suspiciously like a mixture of drugged and drunken laughter*
...mishap. (Funny how years later I can still distinguish his different laughs). Sorry for making you read through that nearly indecipherable attempt at putting his drawl to some kind of phonetic text, but his stories "jus' ain't the same" without it "iff'n y'know what ah mean.".
If you've ever seen Lizard Lick Towing on TV you have some idea of the colorful speech of my ex and the country folk who live around and south of the Mason-Dixon. Kentucky people are exceedingly touchy about the fact that technically they fall north of that line, so one must learn quickly to tailor one's spoken observations regarding what is and is not "south" most especially if one has the vast misfortune (in their eyes) to have been born a "damned Yankee" (a term they still use and still mean with all their hearts). I admit I watch that Lizard Lick often during the winter out of fondness for the good old days, when some form of winter wasn't 9 months of the year and people knew how to have a good time. Say what you want about hillbillies and hicks; those people know how to LIVE life to the fullest each and every day, and they have a way with words like no other people I've ever met in my life. Maybe it's all that sun. Maybe it's brain damage from all that 'shine...pre and post-natally. Actually I cannot say that. Their women folk do not generally drink with the men. It is frowned upon almost as much as being a Yankee.
Anyway, while indulging my homesickness I found this amusing/disturbing rags to riches to rags ...and on the way back to riches again story about a Lexington, Kentucky man. Here's a link to the story and the comment, which I found quite compelling and more than a little familiar:
This woman is nearly as wordy as I am, but damn, a free house, plus air conditioning and Satellite Television, from the coffers of a charity that working people including single parents barely making ends meet contribute to? That does not sound like a sensible use of charity money to me. Not at ALL. In fact I'm pretty pissed off right now and I can truly empathize with her feelings about the situation. And where does Catholic Charities get off with the whole reverse discrimination thing? I feel for undocumented workers, with emphasis on the word WORKERS, but these charity abusers need to be prosecuted somehow, and BIG TIME, because people are legitimately struggling here. Their PAID enablers at Catholic Charities (they don't all volunteer; the people making these decisions are generously compensated and have a great deal of power once in these positions. Large donors are treated like demi-gods. It's a sick, sick system and needs fixing!
I also agree with her assessment of the health care, pharmaceutical and other charity industries. Every time I see that fat smarmy man pimping out those perfectly coiffed, tousled and dirtied yet made-up children in their carefully mis-matched shoes--perfect little urchins with perfect pink pouts and nary a chapped lip among them, though near death from starvation and dehydration, who miraculously have perfect sixty dollar haircuts (there's no disguising them--especially on the boys) I want to throw something at my tv...but something very soft, like maybe a cotton ball, because once those little givers of light die, they stay dead, and it spreads like some kind of TV screen cancer. I found that out by harsh experience on the one item I didn't bother to purchase the extended warranty for. Grr...
I don't know who those people think they're kidding with that advertising and those atrociously fake "please save me" and "I'm helpless and on the verge of giving up" looks on such perfectly healthy children's faces as they stand around what are clearly studio sets. Some charities, like Doctors Without Borders, are clearly real, and their short ads are heart-rending, but these mini-infomercials hosted by the fat guy who looks like a pedophile Santa out of season are just gaudy and ghastly. You know the ones...where they promise you a picture and letters from your very own child. They probably do have kids do the letters...from some sweat shop they're running in China, for which this charity is a probably a big tax write off. Sickening!
I looked up more on the McClellan thing too, and I think it's finally starting to snowball. That thing is also just plain outrageous. The link is here if you want to look into it:
http://www.fortmcclellantoxicexposure.com/
As for the Catholic Charities thing.. the more I read about the Catholic hierarchy, the less I like it. Apparently I am true to the Moravian roots of my ancestors--many of them anyway. Some of the others were Lutheran, which is an off-shoot of the Moravians, who were the first Protestants--the first organized Christian religion to openly rebel against the Catholic Church and the Pope. I am SO proud of that! I am truly tolerant of literally anyone's spiritual beliefs, but I despise "God for money" as much as I despise health care for money, and no church in history is as guilty of money mongering and atrocities than the Catholic Church, not even the greedy cult of Mormonism.
All that said, I truly have nothing against anyone's belief system; I don't have to agree with someone to respect or like them. I don't care if they worship mushrooms. In fact I could be induced to "worship" a mushroom or two myself under the right circumstances....and wood as well....and that can be meant in any number of ways for both. And again I digress, but what a sweet digression it is. In fact it's the perfect note to end on for now.
Just thought I'd leave you with some pretty pictures of mushrooms, since I mentioned them. Be well.
"...slipped 'n fell 'n trahhd t' catch m' balance on the truck door an'it done closed on mah damn finger 'n cut the tip clean off! So ah super-glued it back on lahhk they did at the hoss-spittal back when ah had that ax-cident up 'ere at the fac'try an' it got t' smellin' so rank under that dressin' an' ahh woke you up bah puttin' mah finger up 'ere under yer nose an' you jus' 'bout drah heaved when y'saw what it was..." *long pause for what sounds suspiciously like a mixture of drugged and drunken laughter*
...mishap. (Funny how years later I can still distinguish his different laughs). Sorry for making you read through that nearly indecipherable attempt at putting his drawl to some kind of phonetic text, but his stories "jus' ain't the same" without it "iff'n y'know what ah mean.".
If you've ever seen Lizard Lick Towing on TV you have some idea of the colorful speech of my ex and the country folk who live around and south of the Mason-Dixon. Kentucky people are exceedingly touchy about the fact that technically they fall north of that line, so one must learn quickly to tailor one's spoken observations regarding what is and is not "south" most especially if one has the vast misfortune (in their eyes) to have been born a "damned Yankee" (a term they still use and still mean with all their hearts). I admit I watch that Lizard Lick often during the winter out of fondness for the good old days, when some form of winter wasn't 9 months of the year and people knew how to have a good time. Say what you want about hillbillies and hicks; those people know how to LIVE life to the fullest each and every day, and they have a way with words like no other people I've ever met in my life. Maybe it's all that sun. Maybe it's brain damage from all that 'shine...pre and post-natally. Actually I cannot say that. Their women folk do not generally drink with the men. It is frowned upon almost as much as being a Yankee.
Anyway, while indulging my homesickness I found this amusing/disturbing rags to riches to rags ...and on the way back to riches again story about a Lexington, Kentucky man. Here's a link to the story and the comment, which I found quite compelling and more than a little familiar:
This woman is nearly as wordy as I am, but damn, a free house, plus air conditioning and Satellite Television, from the coffers of a charity that working people including single parents barely making ends meet contribute to? That does not sound like a sensible use of charity money to me. Not at ALL. In fact I'm pretty pissed off right now and I can truly empathize with her feelings about the situation. And where does Catholic Charities get off with the whole reverse discrimination thing? I feel for undocumented workers, with emphasis on the word WORKERS, but these charity abusers need to be prosecuted somehow, and BIG TIME, because people are legitimately struggling here. Their PAID enablers at Catholic Charities (they don't all volunteer; the people making these decisions are generously compensated and have a great deal of power once in these positions. Large donors are treated like demi-gods. It's a sick, sick system and needs fixing!
I also agree with her assessment of the health care, pharmaceutical and other charity industries. Every time I see that fat smarmy man pimping out those perfectly coiffed, tousled and dirtied yet made-up children in their carefully mis-matched shoes--perfect little urchins with perfect pink pouts and nary a chapped lip among them, though near death from starvation and dehydration, who miraculously have perfect sixty dollar haircuts (there's no disguising them--especially on the boys) I want to throw something at my tv...but something very soft, like maybe a cotton ball, because once those little givers of light die, they stay dead, and it spreads like some kind of TV screen cancer. I found that out by harsh experience on the one item I didn't bother to purchase the extended warranty for. Grr...
I don't know who those people think they're kidding with that advertising and those atrociously fake "please save me" and "I'm helpless and on the verge of giving up" looks on such perfectly healthy children's faces as they stand around what are clearly studio sets. Some charities, like Doctors Without Borders, are clearly real, and their short ads are heart-rending, but these mini-infomercials hosted by the fat guy who looks like a pedophile Santa out of season are just gaudy and ghastly. You know the ones...where they promise you a picture and letters from your very own child. They probably do have kids do the letters...from some sweat shop they're running in China, for which this charity is a probably a big tax write off. Sickening!
I looked up more on the McClellan thing too, and I think it's finally starting to snowball. That thing is also just plain outrageous. The link is here if you want to look into it:
http://www.fortmcclellantoxicexposure.com/
As for the Catholic Charities thing.. the more I read about the Catholic hierarchy, the less I like it. Apparently I am true to the Moravian roots of my ancestors--many of them anyway. Some of the others were Lutheran, which is an off-shoot of the Moravians, who were the first Protestants--the first organized Christian religion to openly rebel against the Catholic Church and the Pope. I am SO proud of that! I am truly tolerant of literally anyone's spiritual beliefs, but I despise "God for money" as much as I despise health care for money, and no church in history is as guilty of money mongering and atrocities than the Catholic Church, not even the greedy cult of Mormonism.
All that said, I truly have nothing against anyone's belief system; I don't have to agree with someone to respect or like them. I don't care if they worship mushrooms. In fact I could be induced to "worship" a mushroom or two myself under the right circumstances....and wood as well....and that can be meant in any number of ways for both. And again I digress, but what a sweet digression it is. In fact it's the perfect note to end on for now.
Just thought I'd leave you with some pretty pictures of mushrooms, since I mentioned them. Be well.
Tuesday, February 19, 2013
I Didn't Know Mindy's Music, But I Hear Her Now!
I did not know her music but I hear her now, loud and clear, and I shall do my best to make sure her voice, her spoken voice, is not forgotten. Read on, and please if you do nothing else, click on the link to watch the compelling and brief video below in which she describes how she never had a suicidal thought until AFTER she was prescribed antidepressant medication...and that guy who calls himself "doctor" Drew used her agony to increase his ratings on that dreadful show of his that really began the whole practice of celebrity addict exploitation.
To find the video clip: After selecting "related videos" from the video that automatically runs, please click upper right small image of Mindy as she looks above...unless you want to hear Drew Pinski make excuses for himself and smarm up your experience. I could not get the vid to embed properly. I hope the link works! It's from Examiner.com/Hot Videos for 2/18/13.
Of course the pharmaceutical industry was quick to follow, replacing inexpensive Methadone with Suboxone which was rushed through the approval process even though NO research has been done on what happens to people who take Buprenorphine or Naloxone long term.
This is a deadly serious issue, so none of my usual antics this time 'round, and it hits as close to home as my own heart and soul. The issue is suicide, not only that of Mindy McCready, may she finally rest in peace, but those of countless others who find themselves "hooked" on the most deadly drugs on the planet, antidepressants. I know of these drugs professionally as a former member of the outrageous "health care for profit industry" in America (but soothe my conscience with the knowledge that even as a professional I received precious little of the profit). I am also the surviving sibling of my "baby" brother who committed suicide while being inadequately monitored while being prescribed antidepressants. That is not so easily soothed. He, too, shot himself in the head. Impulse control goes out the window with these vile chemicals, and self loathing soars. That is a LETHAL combination, especially when the ability to sleep (which is when we restore our sanity and work through issues via dream work) is also lost, as is almost always the case. Then sleep aides are added to the mix, and they, too, increase risk of suicide...but the IMPORTANT thing is that they increase the profit margin for Big Pharma, right? ...and THAT, ladies and gents is the bottom line, until enough famous and beautiful people, like Ms. McCready, die and beautiful young tots like her boys are left parentless. If American Big Pharma has a motto, I am quite positive it is "Anything for a dollar!"
I have read several articles now on this tragic...these tragic...suicides. SOMEONE has to STOP the Pharmaceutical Industry from shoving dangerous pills down the throats of every grieving person, every person going through a rough spot in life, every person not happy every single day. A former colleague, another professional in the health care field, went to a conference during which a pharmacy rep got up in front of the audience at the meet and greet as sponsor of the event, as they so often are. It was her job to take notes and pass on the information shared there because we were too busy for all who has signed up to attend. He said the following in complete seriousness [paraphrased]:
"If patients are not responding to the dose [of antidepressant] they're on, keep throwing higher and higher doses at them until they're snowed [medical terminology for NOT clear-headed, in this context]. You can prescribe well beyond the recommended daily milligrams per day, but the patient will have to eat the cost of what their insurance won't pay. If you make it sound like life or death, they'll do it."
Mindy was aware that the antidepressant medication she was taking was responsible for her suicidal ideology. She was pressed by professionals and by the celebrity exploiter and smart artist extraordinaire, Drew Pinski, to continue taking these drugs, even after voicing concerns about having suicidal thoughts for the first time in her life, which were increasing the longer she was on the drugs. He kept her on the drugs. THAT is criminal negligence. Of course the [long list of expletives deleted] pharmaceutical industry makes its money by keeping people as sick as possible for as long as possible and preventing cures at all costs, and most of that cost is lobbying, which costs them PLENTY ... more, in fact, than research and development and the wages and benefits of all their staff combined and a lot of their give-aways would tempt a saint!
While no longer able to give the lavish gifts they once did to doctors who push their drugs, they can still reward doctors in very imaginative ways ...with "extended continuing education opportunities/conferences" in some of the world's most desirable vacation destinations being a big favorite, since wives/girlfriends/favorite nurses can be included if you push enough of their product down your patient's throats. Family Doctors, who spend an average of 5-7 minutes of "face time" per patient and RARELY if EVER provide adequate follow-up for their allegedly clinically depressed patients, who should be referred out for PSYCHIATRIST consults if they're so sure they need medication! Instead they're just "thrown" on the "miracle drug du jour" (even though that "new miracle drug" is just a slightly tweaked version of the same old drug with the same dangerous side effect--that being DEATH BY SUICIDE!
And the PATIENT is left with the responsibility to call and make regular follow-up appointments...the patient who is SO psychologically unstable that life threatening medication is absolutely necessary! That person is left with that HUGE responsibility of arranging and showing up for incredibly important follow-up and for recognizing signs of intolerance and side effects that NO doctor, I don't care HOW good s/he is, can possibly explain in 5-7 minutes of face time. In exactly WHAT world does that make ANY sense...AT ALL?
"Some people, especially depressed people are at higher risk for suicide," you might be thinking, and while that's a valid thought, the LEGITIMATE studies NOT sponsored by Big Pharma, show a SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASED RISK OF SUICIDE IN PATIENTS ON ANTIDEPRESSANTS, especially SSRIs. So while that is how the Drug Industry has gotten away with pushing these drugs on nearly everyone who walks into a doctor's office for so long, their hold on the FDA is weakening in the face of study after study (and a steadily growing pile of dead bodies with only antidepressants in common).
My own doctor tried to push antidepressants on me for DECADES simply because he once put depression down as a diagnosis on my chart when he prescribed one off-label for another use! That is EXACTLY how closely most Family Doctors monitor their patients--even the otherwise good ones, like mine, who are just SO pressed for time ALL the time, that they go through their day at a dead run. At least he washes his HANDS, which is rare, very rare. Many docs seem to think they are too godly for germs to grow on them...honestly.
What is clear in Mindy's case is that she had NO thoughts of suicide BEFORE she took the pills. She says so very clearly and soberly, and AFTER the death of her boyfriend. Sadly it takes the deaths of celebrities to get people THINKING in this world. I hope it does in this case before more people die needless deaths...then maybe those poor little boys of hers will not have lost their beautiful mother for nothing...or nothing more important than a higher profit margin for Big Pharma.
I just don't understand how so many people get sucked in to this. Yes, feeling bad is terrible, but isn't feeling GOOD worth it? Some of the greatest musical, literary and fine artists of all time suffered and survived the full range of emotions. That ability to feel so deeply is often what creates art. We don't all need to be flat of affect or falsely happy little Stepfords all the time. I truly do NOT understand where this happiness industry sprang from, aside from perhaps the same place conservative republicans come from--that place where people went down some kind of rabbit hole and dreamed that once upon a time there was a perfect utopia when everyone was happy because men were men and women knew their place and no minorities or gay people existed, and they don't realize the dream was just a dream and they've re-awakened into the real world. I don't think there's a cure for that though, aside from a few heavy doses of ECT perhaps... I VOLUNTEER to deliver them! (Okay, even on this sad day, I had to indulge in some antics.)
Maybe at some point the Insurance industry will figure out they'll actually SAVE money by paying for people to get REAL psychological care (which means more than 6 visits per lifetime) rather than just forcing them to live on deadly pills that destroy their judgment and impulse control--pills that make men impotent and women unable to achieve orgasm (as if being depressed isn't miserable enough!) pills that make people walking time bombs. Maybe they'll learn that therapy once or twice a month is cheaper than pills for decades, pills that lead to more pills to help the first ones work better, then more pills to deal with the side effects of all that medication, then eventually maybe even a liver or kidney transplant (after dialysis of course) if enough pills are accidentally or intentionally taken by a person who suffers enough dementia as a result! The list of possible physiological issues as well as psychological ones is nearly endless.
In Europe ALL antidepressants carry warning labels clearly stating that suicide is a risk factor for ALL ages which is ACCURATE. SUICIDE DOES NOT HAPPEN NEARLY AS OFTEN IN TRULY CIVILIZED NATIONS WHERE MEDICINE IS A CALLING TO HEAL AND PREVENT ILLNESS, NOT A CAPITALIST INDUSTRY WHERE MONEY, NOT HUMAN LIFE IS THE BOTTOM LINE!
Friday, December 28, 2012
Professor Brian Cox, Mad Money
Okay, this gets on my very last mid-holiday nerve.
I'm sitting here, hoping to have a quiet moment with my friend and confidant, the guy I turn to in times of deepest doubt and despair, or when I need a little fun time. Yes, of course I'm talking about my PC, whom I have named Mr. OMGWTFPWNFTWPMPSauce (I know it's a lot to type, but he's earned each and every keystroke, and more).
Now picture this... Seeking distraction from the running soap opera that has become life in my family, I have just viewed a slightly dated (sadly there aren't any other kind) episode of "Wonders of the Universe" which is narrated by Peter Pan-like Professor Brian Cox, the engaging and boyishly charming Physicist cum Pop Star (or is that the other way around?) with the Northern accent I find so scrumptious it's brought Oldham close to the top of my Watering Can List (BB does not do buckets). Said professor has just spent over forty of my precious downtime minutes explaining how life thrives in incredibly extreme conditions on our own planet and how it could definitely do so elsewhere in the universe. He does seem a tad condescending at times, but it does make the show accessible to a larger audience, and it's good to catch young elastic minds before they're corrupted by crass commercialism...and bored teachers just going through the motions and teaching to the test. Besides, I doubt that boyish persona would work if he spoke to us as if we'd been farther educated than a "slow" fourteen year old. See how neatly I ducked that 'cross the pond difference in which label they attach to place in school at that particular age in the UK vs the US? Nicely done, no?
The show is carefully researched and as we have already discussed, deliciously narrated, and it is also beautifully shot and artistically rendered, with majestic footage of massive vistas, unexpected terrestrial wildlife and microscopic miracles of unimagined life forms. From space and helos and through lenses of incredible strength and clarity we see example after dynamic example of unlikely environments; as Cox lifts the veil of mystery surrounding the creatures that flourish here in places of which even well educated people are only vaguely aware. And it's all so early in the life-span of our own baby solar system. With an unusual mix of knowing teacher and excited student he gives us excellent arguments for how life is very likely to have existed on Mars as it possibly does on Europa, Jupiter's closest moon, the smoothest body in our solar system, because its surface is "an unbroken shell of ice." He is utterly convincing and truly is filled with wonder as he carries us along on yet another magical mystery tour.
Jupiter's first moon, Europa |
Having spent the program showing us these amazing extremophiles, and so many likely cases of extraterrestrial life so relatively close to us, he sums up the program with his fresh faced flair (say that five times fast) and restates that all the necessities for life, water being chief among them, have been shown to exist and likely do exist in many other places. Here I note that he does not even mention in passing the unimaginable vastness and complexity of the universe, and I start to get a little bit of a funny feeling about what may be coming next. Oh no, please don't let it be so. Not Brian Cox. I love Brian Cox, like with a pitter-pattering heart ...and butterflies. He takes me back to my childhood when everything was fresh and new and thrilling and the world was more wow! than yes ...and?
Screw childhood and butterflies. What I see above are two parts of a me sandwich! |
I should follow my instinct turn off the tele right now and leave well enough alone, but no, I have been dying my life away, one small death at a time of morbid curiosity (oh yes, I wish I meant the Shakespearean "little death" too, Love!). As the program draws to its, one would think inevitable conclusion, that familiar, direct and guileless gaze seems to somehow glaze over. Is it my imagination or is my favourite professor beginning to look less like my first boyfriend's best friend friend (therefore taboo for life) on whom I still have an "omg I'm blushing" crush ...and more like the void visage of a man whose ego has grown a bit too large for his own head, even with those new cheeks? It's so refreshing to see that men have a little work done now and then too. *big smile* I haven't had to go to those lengths yet, but then I haven't spent as much time out in the climate as he has.
Not quite so "cheeky" here as he has been of late. |
Amazon decimated for packaging for Barbie and Ken. |
It's a toughie, but I am pretty sure I prefer the 'before' picture, thank you. |
You may want to ...well actually I assume you're sitting, never mind. Professor Dr. Brian Cox, the cute boy wonder of the science scene who tells us all the fun facts about so many things, looks the camera in the eye and with all the wanton boastfulness of a drunken braggart proclaims with complete conviction that man, as in the human being, is the only intelligent life form in the universe. He's not joking. He didn't grimace or blink or show any kind of tell. I didn't see more than the usual flush creep up his neck, ears or cheeks. Of course I may have been looking at some of that nifty camera work, so maybe I missed it, but he goes on to say man is the only being in the entire universe with the acumen to shape his environment to his needs, the evidence of which is writ large across Earth's face. He takes a short dramatic pause and then adds ...and also the brilliance and bravery to leave his home planet in search of the wonders of the universe!
As my ex husband would say in his southern US drawl, "Do what now?"
*shrug*
*sniff*
*sigh*
Please bear with me a moment, humour is my coping mechanism, and it usually works, and if that doesn't work, being catty is always my sure-fire, no fail back-up plan, but I've just taken a bit of a shot to the heart here. As a natural-born geek, who suffered all the slings and arrows any geek suffers, in addition to being female, blonde and bodacious (I didn't do it, it was Mother Nature, take it up with Her) I take my science shows, and their hosts, seriously. Some women dream of being carried off in the night by hunks with six-pack abs (and nine ....figure bank accounts) who could stop a van from crashing into them with one hand while slicking back their perfectly styled hair with the other. I dream of men who can, in the dead of night, whisper to me of mysteries obscure and arcane. So it's a sad day for BB when she learns a member of her top eleven or so is apparently bipolar or suffering NPD (Narcissistic Personality Disorder, which used to be called Grandiosity or Delusions or Grandeur). Either that or some other gem from the misery-filled, pharmaceutical industry-supporting pages of the DSM...what are we up to, V now, I think.
I almost, and please note I do say almost, hope he's simply religiously devout, and that's the basis for his naive, inane, jejune um... stance. Surely it is just that, a stance, not a true belief! Maybe his wife is devout and he wishes to please her. She looks rather rigid in her photograph. *Hiss* Our little boy seems to have need of a mommy figure, but I digress. *Meow* And let's face it, we've already established I'm jealous. It's hardly fair to blame the wife for the idiocy of the husband, unless it really is her fault of course. IT happens. Oh, nvm on the religious nut thing. I see here, he's an atheist:
‘If you say the world is 6,000 years old, then you’re daft. It isn’t. Some people just don’t understand rational thinking! We know that the sun is 4.5 billion years old and the universe is 13.7 billion years old.
‘But I do think there’s common ground between religion and science in that you notice that the world is beautiful and that nature is absolutely fascinating.’
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Well, better arrogant than ignorant.
But that just sooooooooo doesn't fit his personality. I get that people have a public persona they put on a take off for the camera, but not all of how he behaves can be fake. I've seen too much in life to fall for that. So logic informs me he must have an agenda. Aha! An agenda! What did I say back there a bit ago... yes! It's a stance, with a purpose, and that purpose is...? What are the three main purposes nearly all men have in life? Sex, sex and sex. No really, sex, food and money, right? To be honest I think the money's just so they can get the best food and sex...or so they think, equating physical attributes with good sex, dolts that they are. And oh yeah, I forgot toys. Boys must have their toys, and I can't argue with them on that one. So funding it is, then, right? He's not a ranting lunatic or flagrant egotist after all. I can still luv him! Yay!
Whew, thank goodness, because I really do like him, and almost even better, he's not nearly so young as I thought! Unfortunately there's still that married thing...*sigh* But still...
Okay, now it's simple. All scientists need funding, it's a curse of the profession. In that light this asinine declaration that man is the only intelligent life form makes perfect sense. When he states he's attempting to disprove the hypothesis that intelligent life exists on other planets, it's not only correct practice according to the strict (and rightfully so) confines of Scientific Method, but it's the big C ...controversial!
I believe the equation is: Star Power + Controversy = *cha-ching!* |
What does controversy do? It attracts attention! What does increased attention do? It increases profits for whomever sponsors and/or puts him on the tele, which also puts money in the bank account of Professor and Mrs. Cox, which gets him more sex, better food and more toys..I mean it eventually gets him the Nobel Prize when he finds life on another planet! ...or the Nobel Prize and "...book tokens or Nectar points" Source as Professor Cox himself sardonically stated when speaking to "BBC bosses" who asked if some kind of prize need be given to anyone appearing on their show who might find intelligent life on another planet.
Prof Cox also said he had a second bizarre encounter with BBC bosses during the show when he suggested asking volunteers to scour pictures of Mars for signs of geological activity that computer scrutiny might have missed. ‘Someone from the BBC said to me, “Would there have to be a prize if someone discovered it?”
‘(I said), “What do you mean? You’re going to say to someone, you discovered the first evidence for alien life beyond Earth – and here’s a book voucher as well?
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Clearly our darling Professor is loving the publicity his little statement has engendered. He has never enjoyed more fame. He's an OBE, so far. He's doing almost as many experiments as he could possibly want, and he's on the tele and making money. I think this case can be closed, at least for the time being.
Bow ties ARE cool! |
I am so relieved that in writing this and sharing my over-wrought emotions with Mr. OMGWTFPWNFTWPMPSauce and you, I've found the true source of this outlandish dichotomy of thought. I am making no sweeping statements about life on other planets (unlike some people we know), I'm just keepin' it real.
*Graciously bows and accepts accolades and applause*
Thank you, thank you veddy much!
I'd like to close with this slightly out of character reality check. Stephen Hawking is my preferred expert on this particular subject. No Peter Pan antics or pseudo-scientific rationalizations for the raging global technocracy currently devouring Earth and her resources. Hawking takes no pride in man's destruction, I call it rape and murder, of what was a pristine, beautiful and bountiful planet, perfectly suited to sustain life in perpetuity, or at least until the next ice age. He takes a more realistic and cautious view, as described simply and powerfully below, and it doesn't even need pictures...the imagery is self evident:
Stephen Hawking has revealed he strongly believes in aliens and warned that Earth could be at risk from an invasion.
In a documentary series, the renowned astrophysicist argued that it is 'perfectly rational' to assume intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe.
Professor Hawking said: 'We only have to look at ourselves to see how intelligent life might develop into something we wouldn’t want to meet.
'I imagine they might exist in massive ships, having used up all the resources from their home planet.
'Such advanced aliens would perhaps become nomads, looking to conquer and colonise whatever planets they can reach.'
It would be 'too risky' to attempt to make contact with alien races, he concluded.
'If aliens ever visit us, I think the outcome would be much as when Christopher Columbus first landed in America, which didn’t turn out very well for the Native Americans.'
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)