Wednesday, November 30, 2005

An Envious Engels

According to a recent study, creative people are more likely to have more sexual partners:

The study found professional artists and poets have about twice as many sexual partners as those who do not indulge in these creative activities. The authors also delved into the personalities of artists and poets and discovered they shared some traits with the mentally ill.

Or alternatively, as one of the researchers suggests, women, for one reason or the other, revere men who are talented in art, music, or writing, and creative men have more women in their social and professional circles. Therefore, the creative male does what any normal male would do, and capitalises off this situation.

I studied mathematics and physics at university. The number of attractive women I met? None. The number of women who find what I studied interesting or appealing? Next to none. The best I ever received was "well, you must be intelligent" or "are you gonna be a school teacher?" A ha, whatever you say, darling.

Meanwhile, if you grow your hair long, own an acoustic guitar, and knock out a few poorly-done Jeff Buckley's covers, women will line up from miles around to, lyrical with you. It's a travesty.

I was artistic when I was young, believer it or not. I chose to pursue the sciences. If you were foolish enough to choose a profession which women don't find appealing, I recommend you say you're returning to university to complete your graduate programme in medicine or you volunteer to save whales.

Tuesday, November 29, 2005

Sex and the Emerald Isle

Imagine my surprise last week while walking to my local bakery I discovered that some devious entrepreneurs had opened up an Adult Shop. Where were the warnings? Where were the newspaper articles outlining and censuring this travesty? Where were the angry and concerned citizens? This establishment of wanton filth is not more than a hundred metres from the local high school. Will somebody please think of the children!

And then I realised I wasn’t in Ireland any more. Last year my mate and I spent five months working (and tasting many a pint of Guinness) in the beloved Emerald Isel. During that time, a nondescript and modest looking adult shop did indeed open up around the corner from where I lived. This ruffled the feathers of many devout Catholics and inspired them to take shifts in protesting right outside this lewd establishment.

Now, where in Oz there’s no mistaking an adult shop when you see one (with their glaring neon-signs and giant…hearts), in Ireland they are virtually invisible. A cursory glance and you would miss this place. In fact, once the protests had died down, I had some fellow ask me to direct him to the adult shop when he was merely 30 m up the street from it.

There’s this idea that travelling will remove various stereotypes. I use to think that the Irish were all happy, English-hating*, alcoholic Catholics. Little has changed, though they are improving as they don't hate the Enlgish that much anymore.

* A couple of months ago I had a pom try to convince me that the Irish didn’t hate the English. Um, just because they shag your women, doesn’t mean they still don’t hate you, mate.

Monday, November 28, 2005

Debut Rant - Creationism

I thought I'd start with a classic rant about creationism. Although an old rant, creationism, ahem, Intelligent Design has been receiving some publicity of late. I found this creationism site created by a Dr Richard Kent. Although Dr Kent is a medical doctor, allegedly, he is not a real doctor, particularly in the field of science. Dr Kent has chosen to list flawed arguments in order to convince us why a collection of mainly Judeo-Christian myths is the best source of explaining ours and the Earth's existence.

Now normally I would expect this sort of thing from the States (red) or even parts of our beloved Oz (namely, QLD), though it does pain me to admit it. It's a shame to see this lunacy in the UK. Dr Kent's arguments are mainly of the form: name a random piece of fact/fiction, draw erroneous conclusion, ergo Bible is right. Let's look at a few examples:

The Great Barrier Reef, Australia

is 4,200 years old.
This is consistent with a flood 4,400 years ago, as the Bible says.

Um, NO, Dr Kent. There are parts of the Great Barrier Reef up to 60, 000 years old.

Magnetic field of the Earth

The Earth's Magnetic field is getting weaker. This means that:

The Earth cannot be millions of years old.
Carbon dating does not work.

I've never read anything ever suggesting that the Earth's magnetic field is weakening although it is changing orientation, which it has done so for millennia. Scientists don't use the Carbon dating to measure the Earth's age. Strangely enough, they only use Carbon dating to measure the age of things which contain Carbon i.e. organic matter like plants and animals.

Space Dust

If the Universe is billions of years old, there should not be any space dust.
In 1955, scientists predicted that Moon dust might be several miles deep.
Huge landing pads were put on the spacecraft for the moon landing so that it would not sink into the dust.
In fact it was found that the dust on the Moon was about ½ inch deep only, suggesting a young Moon.
Dust actually gathers at the rate of 2.7 inches per million years.

So by your calculations, the moon is 135 000 years old. But you're saying the Universe is only 6000 years old. Hmm, should've done the maths Dr Kent.

The remaining arguments consist largely of quotes from lunatic scientistis such as Fred Hoyle and blatant misunderstandings of phyiscal principles and laws such as the butchering of the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

I just realised, Dr Kent acknowledges my old mate, Kent Hovind (he calls himself a "doctor" too but he's lost all proof of ever receiving a doctorate). I can't believe this guy receives air-time in the States.

Saturday, November 26, 2005


Well, I finally got off my holidaying arse and did it.

Those poor souls who know me are completely aware that I read too much, and have too many opinions on a variety of topics, be them contemporary, important or neither.

This blog is an attempt to express a sample of these opinions. However, this blog is more than just an outlet where I can bitch, whinge, whine, rant and complain about various meaningless subjects. It's also a platform where I can tear apart common misconceptions, criticise popular trends, talk nerd about science and popular culture, sacrifice many a sacred cow, and ultimately, fulfill my self-indulgent needs.

Naturally, as time unfolds I should find my footing and develop a certain whinging style. I’ll endure to make this blog more than a “I went to work today. It sucked. That’s another day gone ” blog - as entertaining as they are. And of course, I will focus on topics which I know something about (e.g. X-men comics or famous German mathematicians) and abstain from topics I know nothing about (e.g. writing elegant prose or Australian politics).

Finally, I endeavour to ensure that all my rants contain, at least some, factual information whenever possible. But then again, one should never let the truth get in the way of a good story.