Human Extinction Might Be A Good Thing, Professor Says

“There are stirrings of discussion these days in philosophical circles about the prospect of human extinction. This should not be surprising, given the increasingly threatening predations of climate change. In reflecting on this question, I want to suggest an answer to a single question, one that hardly covers the whole philosophical territory but is an important aspect of it. Would human extinction be a tragedy?”

So wrote Todd May, a professor of philosophy at Clemson University, in an opinion piece for The New York Times. Well, that is a puzzler, professor. Holy crap, no wonder progressives are fine with abortion!

May then states, “I am also not asking whether human beings as a species deserve to die out,” though he added, “that is an important question.” He “tentatively” suggests that human extinction would be both a tragedy and “that it might just be a good thing.” Why might it be a good thing? Because “Human beings are destroying large parts of the inhabitable earth and causing unimaginable suffering to many of the animals that inhabit it. Humanity, then, is the source of devastation of the lives of conscious animals on a scale that is difficult to comprehend.”

The professor perfunctorily admits that animals treat each other badly at times, too, but concludes: “there is no other creature in nature whose predatory behavior is remotely as deep or as widespread as the behavior we display toward what the philosopher Christine Korsgaard aptly calls ‘our fellow creatures’ in a sensitive book of the same name.” Note to May: which of “our fellow creatures” are currently ruminating on their relations with humans and each other?

May avers: “If this were all to the story there would be no tragedy. The elimination of the human species would be a good thing, full stop,” before gallantly admitting: “But there is more to the story. Human beings bring things to the planet that other animals cannot. For example, we bring an advanced level of reason that can experience wonder at the world in a way that is foreign to most if not all other animals. We create art of various kinds: literature, music and painting among them. We engage in sciences that seek to understand the universe and our place in it. Were our species to go extinct, all of that would be lost.” Well, there is that.

He notes, however, that “there might be those on the more jaded side who would argue that if we went extinct there would be no loss, because there would be no one for whom it would be a loss not to have access to those things.” Moreover, May observes, “One could press the objection here by saying that it would only be a loss from a human viewpoint, and that that viewpoint would no longer exist if we went extinct.”

Which leads him to say: “One might ask here whether, given this view, it would also be a good thing for those of us who are currently here to end our lives in order to prevent further animal suffering. Although I do not have a final answer to this question, we should recognize that the case of future humans is very different from the case of currently existing humans. To demand of currently existing humans that they should end their lives would introduce significant suffering among those who have much to lose by dying. In contrast, preventing future humans from existing does not introduce such suffering, since those human beings will not exist and therefore not have lives to sacrifice.”

The positing professor concludes his preposterous philosophical exercise: “It may well be, then, that the extinction of humanity would make the world better off and yet would be a tragedy. I don’t want to say this for sure, since the issue is quite complex. It may also turn out that it is through our own actions that we human beings bring about our extinction, or at least something near it, contributing through our practices to our own tragic end.” Wouldn’t that be a good thing?

The assertion that humans are nothing more than glorified animals, with marginally greater capacity for pondering their place in the cosmos and creating works of art and blessed with opposable thumbs that allow us to effectively utilize tools, is ironically ever more prevalent amongst societal elites. Progressives go to great lengths to blur the distinctions between man and beast, man and woman, and right and wrong, concepts of which only humans are fully cognizant.

If the total extinction of human beings might be a “good thing,” might not the elimination of any given group of humans be beneficial, as well? This is the historic train of thought socialists and progressives have taken in the past to arrive at eugenics, ethnic cleansing, “the final solution,” and abortion rights. The moral poverty that leads to man pondering eliminating himself stems from his decision to dispense with the notion of a higher power.

What is striking in Professor May’s surmising—and in nearly all of the elite’s discussion of supposedly existential matters—is the complete lack of a Biblical perspective. It’s never brought up. It’s as if they couldn’t countenance such silly notions, couldn’t risk being ridiculed by their peers for such an unsophisticated, unscientific perspective. Some guy in the sky? What a laughable, white male patriarchal construct!  

“So, God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and every creature that crawls upon the earth.”

That wouldn’t be very woke! What an egotistical, misogynistic, non-egalitarian, humanist deity “He” would be! “He” would certainly be banned from campus! Oh, that’s right, He already is.

Let’s do the world a favor. Objectively speaking, we should all kill ourselves right now. Especially those independent, cis-gender, macho types who ride horses and herd cattle…and tend to vote Republican.

Save the Universe. Smite a cowboy.

Something to ponder as we enter 2019.

                                                                         

Beelzebub And The Baker

                  Jack Phillips should’ve been greatly relieved when the United States Supreme Court ruled in his favor recently. The Denver-based baker had previously been taken to court for refusing to comply with a gay couple’s wedding cake order. However, on that same day, according to court documents reviewed by Newsweek, the devout Christian received a request from a Church of Satan member wanting Phillips to make a cake in celebration of Satan’s birthday: “I’m thinking a three-tiered white cake. Cheesecake frosting. And the topper should be a large figure of Satan, licking a 9” black Dildo. I would like the dildo to be an actual working model, that can be turned on before we unveil the cake. I can provide it for you if you don’t have the means to procure it yourself.”

                 Phillips “politely declined” the request. Newsweek contacted other prominent Denver-area bakeries, all of which said they would make a transgender cake with blue icing and pink batter. Conversely, all but one stated that making one with Satan licking a dildo was going too far. One area baker told Newsweek he suspects the person placing the order meant to request “cream cheese icing.” He added, “I don’t know why someone would want Satan on a cake,” while asking to remain anonymous in addressing such a controversial topic.

                 Refusal to put a large figure of Satan licking a 9” dildo on a cake is a controversial topic?!?! I remember when Ginger vs. Mary Ann was a controversial topic. The Culture War has long since been lost.

                Phillips was recently cited by the state of Colorado for wrongly denying a transgender customer’s birthday cake request, and suspects the same person requested the Satan cakes. And this wasn’t the first such request he’s received. Apparently, they’ve become almost commonplace. Phillips thinks a local transgender “woman” named Autumn Scardina is behind several of the requests. Phillips received an email recently requesting a cake for Satan’s birthday to include “red-and -black icing” and “an upside-down cross under the head of Lucifer.” He replied, saying he wouldn’t make the cake due to his religious beliefs. Then came a phone order for a red-and-black theme cake with “an image of Satan smoking marijuana.” (Well, it is Colorado, after all). The caller I.D. screen read “Scardina.” On another occasion, two people came into Phillips’ Masterpiece Cakeshop asking for a cake adorned with a “pentagram.” When prompted for their names, one responded with “Autumn Marie.”

               Phillips suggests that these orders may not have come from a Satanist, but from Scardina, who is a local attorney. There’s a difference? (Just kidding attorneys! Sort of…). Scardina may well be both.

               Phillips says he and his family have been living in fear and have received death threats. One caller told him that he wanted to cut him up with a machete. Vandals recently threw rocks at the bakery in the middle of the night, triggering his alarm system. His business is struggling. He’s had to cut his 10-member staff down to four. The legal battles have taken their toll. He says, “It’s been tough to make everything work.”  

              It is not a coincidence that small, private bakeries are being targeted. As Mark Steyn notes, “Betrothed gays looking for wedding cakes and floral arrangements are not just carelessly stumbling into homophobic bakeries and florists. It's an organized campaign consciously targeting particular establishments. That's why no gay couples have wandered into a Muslim patisserie in Dearborn... and, if they did, they'd be the ones in hiding. Tim Cook, the Apple CEO who'll have no truck with Hoosier homophobes, is happy to enrich Iran's mullahs so they can build fancier gay gallows on which to hang the sodomites. Muscle respects muscle.”

              I’m sure there are LGBTQIA bakers who would make the Satan/dildo cake, but balk at making a cake celebrating Trump’s election or, say, the repeal of Roe v. Wade.

              Poor Jack Phillips. He just wanted to make a rewarding middle-class life for himself and his family, doing what he had a passion to do. He just wanted to mix a little flour, a little sugar, maybe add some food coloring and make a nice frosting. A two-tier or three-tier cake? Sure. Maybe even put a small elf or deer figurine on top. Instead, he’s the center of controversy, constantly fighting ideological and political battles. What bullshit. What a travesty. What a sad statement on modern society.

              Leftists make everything—literally everything—political. You want a cake celebrating the Anti-Christ? Make your own damn Satan cake-- replete with a dildo of any size-- if you like. And eat it, too, for all we care.

  But leave the rest of us the hell alone.

Student Group Wants University To Pay For Cosmetic Transgender Surgery

                Graduate Students United, a student group at George Washington University, recently launched a petition demanding that the school’s student health insurance policy be amended to cover elective mastectomies and male breast implants as well as voice modification and hair removal procedures. (The policy already covers hormone replacement therapy and counseling treatment for those with gender dysphoria). Who could have even imagined the phrases “elective mastectomies” and “male breast implants” just a few short years ago? Maybe these could take place in adjoining rooms. One attending physician could just lop off the breasts of the “transgender man” and another could quickly affix them to the “transgender woman” next door. A no-fuss, no-muss zero-sum game if ever there was one. Talk about the grass being greener on the other side! Just line up the erstwhile women out one door and the persons formerly known as men out the other. Presto! Transgender factory! Genius, if I do say so myself!

                GSU considers transgender “cosmetic” surgical procedures to be “comprehensive healthcare rights.” If I was at the university and I wanted a horn—or a penis, for that matter—stapled to my forehead, would the school see to my comprehensive “healthcare” rights?

                GSU’s petition states: “We agree with groups like the Transgender Law Center that it is up to the individual and their physician, not Aetna, to determine what is medically necessary. Any pre-set exclusion of ‘cosmetic’ procedures is an unacceptable method of providing adequate healthcare. GW should make assisting its trans students and employees a priority, especially in light of recent attacks by the Trump administration.” Medically necessary? Slicing off parts of one’s body and suppressing hormonal development, just to name two of the procedures, are medically very dangerous, not “necessary” to be covered as electives.

                A member of the group recently met with the university’s president, according to the school’s student newspaper, and stated that he “did not agree with the clauses and does not want to prevent transgender individuals from seeking certain procedures.” The paper also reported that the Dean of the Student Experience, Cissy Petty (supply your own joke here), told it that GWU will address the language in its health policy to make the wording better reflect “our university values.” Apparently, the university values aiding and abetting its students in their dangerous attempts to become something they simply cannot be, their later mental and physical health be damned.

                George Washington was the Father of His Country… and the man for whom this university was named. It’s a good thing he lived when he did, for multiple reasons. If today’s values and advanced medical procedures had been the norm prior to the Revolution, he might have been encouraged to become transgender. Were that the case, it’s doubtful “she” would have gone on to become the Mother of Her Country.

   She certainly wouldn’t have had the balls to defeat the British.

The End Of The World Is Nigh

                As Woody Allen once said: “More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly.”

                New York Times columnist Carl Zimmer recently wrote a piece averring that mankind is sowing the seeds of its own (and nearly every other species’) mass extinction via global warming. He compares where we are now to the time leading up to the worst mass extinction in the planet’s history, a mere 252 million years ago, when, he asserts, the “Earth almost died.” Zimmer notes that 96% of all ocean species became extinct due to this event at the end of the Permian Period. Not “roughly 95%” or 97%, but precisely 96%. Given that we don’t know how many species are alive today, nor how many may have ceased to be over the Millenia, I believe there is at least a 96% chance that figure is incorrect.

                Scientists believe the Permian-Triassic die-off was due to a series of volcanoes-- in what is now Siberia-- erupting on a massive scale. They claim the staggering amounts of magma and lava they emitted injected similarly massive amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, trapping heat and leading to rapid, cataclysmic warming of land and sea.

                I thought volcano eruptions led to cooling of the Earth due to blocking of the sun’s rays. At least that’s what experts were worried about when Mount St. Helens blew her top back in 1980. And when Mount Pinatubo erupted in 1991, which cooled the Earth by 0.5 degrees Celsius. It’s odd, the sun doesn’t get credit for warming anymore. It’s all due to cow farts, lawn mowers, and coal plants.

                Anyway, the warmer the water, the less oxygen it holds. Voila, everything’s dead. Researchers estimate, according to Zimmer, “that the surface of the ocean warmed by about 18 degrees Fahrenheit.” Meteorologists can’t accurately estimate what the temperature will be in my yard at 6 p.m. next Thursday.  Nevertheless, we are “repeating the process, the scientists warn.”

                Curtis Deutsch, an earth scientist at the University of Washington, and Justin Penn, a graduate student, are co-authors of a new study, published in the journal Science, purporting to show that we may be paralleling that climate change today. Due, of course, to man’s profligate use of fossil fuels to make and deliver pointless goods and services such as food, clothing, shelter, and medical care.

                Fortunately, to test their hypothesis, Dr. Deutsch and Penn “recreated the world at the end of the Permian Period with a large-scale computer simulation, complete with a heat-trapping atmosphere and a circulating ocean. “Recreated the world?” Did they do it in six days or less, beating our original Creator? I’m sure they didn’t overlook a single factor contributing to the planetary environment of 252 million years ago, nor how each and every possible variable interacted with all the others.  Amazing!

                As previously mentioned, the experts claim that the warmer the water, the less oxygen it can hold. That may well be true, but they go on to say that, on the ocean’s surface, photosynthetic algae produced oxygen, whereas the ocean depths were deprived of oxygen. So, the algae didn’t die where it was warmest? Moreover, they say, as the ocean warmed, the circulatory currents also slowed, letting oxygen-poor water settle to the bottom.

                Cold water is significantly denser than warm water. Warm water stays on the surface, buoyed and supported by the denser cold water underneath, until the warm surface water is dramatically cooled, gets heavier, and then sinks to the bottom. This is what is responsible for lakes “turning over” in the fall. Water doesn’t automatically sink because currents slow or its oxygen content is reduced.

                Deutsch and Penn teamed up with paleontologists at Stanford University, digging into “a huge online database of fossils to chart the risks of extinction at different latitudes during the catastrophe.” They compared this analysis to their computer model’s prediction. They matched, leading Dr. Deutsch to exclaim, “This was the most exciting moment of my life.” I hope Dr. Deutsch doesn’t have a wife. Or kids.

                The penultimate sentence in Zimmer’s piece solemnly states: “Just how much warmer the planet will get is up to us. It will take a tremendous international effort to keep the increase below about 4 degrees Fahrenheit.” No, it is not simply “up to us,” as we know for certain, since arguably the fastest and most massive global warming in Earth’s history took place roughly 252 million years before mankind had any effect whatsoever on greenhouse gases… according to the study’s own authors. Homo Sapiens was not one of the species killed off in the “Great Elimination”…because we weren’t yet around.

                Zimmer’s primer concludes by sniffing: “If we proceed to use up all the fossil fuels on Earth, it could warm by as much as 17 degrees Fahrenheit by 2300.”

Just 1 degree less than it did on its own…… 252 million years ago.

               

Obama Claims Credit For U.S. Oil Production

                Former President Barack Obama, The Arrogant One, recently made a claim that should immediately see him put in the preposterous statement Hall of Fame…or Hall of Shame.

                Speaking at Rice University’s Baker Institute for its 25^th anniversary gala, Obama told the over 1,000 assembled guests, “I was extraordinarily proud of the Paris accords because—you know, I know we’re in oil country and we need American energy, and by the way, American energy production, you wouldn’t always know it but it went up every year I was president. That whole, suddenly America’s like the biggest oil producer and the biggest gas—that was me, people. Just say thank you please.”

                If he was Pinocchio, his nose would’ve spanned the distance from Houston to San Antonio by the time he was done falsely congratulating himself.

                I know Obama isn’t a big fan of the Jewish state, but talk about chutzpah! The Paris Accord was an agreement to slash use and production of fossil fuels. Talk about delusional! Obama himself publicly said that fuel prices must rise dramatically if we were to have any hope of saving the planet. He talked about $5-per-gallon gasoline. He put the kibosh on the Keystone Pipeline and refused to consider new coal plants. His Secretary of State went on to become the first American presidential aspirant to campaign in West Virginia and tell its citizens that we must put a complete stop to the mining coal. “Sorry about all your jobs! Vote for me!”

                Obama’s statement would be akin to Neville Chamberlain saying to Czechoslovakians on August 31^st, 1939: “I was extraordinarily proud of the Munich Agreement because—you know, this whole ‘peace in our time’—that was me people. I've kept us out of war ever since. Just say thank you please.”

                It would be as if George H.W. Bush (God rest his soul) had said in recent years: “I am extraordinarily proud that broccoli production went up every year I was president. The United States is now the 3^rd leading producer of broccoli in the world. Overall, broccoli consumption has gone up roughly 940% from 1990 to 2015. That was me, people. Just say thank you please.”

Blackfishing?

                You’ve heard of catfishing: luring someone into a relationship by means of a fictional online persona. But now, apparently, there’s “blackfishing.” Alicja Brzostowska, a white female student at the University of Birmingham, has been accused of posing as a black person on Instagram. Brzostowska, obviously Polish if her name is any guide, was outed, for some reason, by a busy-body Canadian writer named Wanna (!) Thompson. Shortly thereafter, she began to receive online threats, including demands that she kill herself.

                Thompson took to Twitter asking: “Can we start a thread and post all of the white girls cosplaying as black women on Instagram? She received over 1,000 responses, many replete with photos. Critics say that women who pretend to be black don’t understand the culture and struggle that black people have gone through and are still going through. Alicja, a Polish blogger, told the BBC that she has always been olive skinned, and that her lips haven’t been surgically enhanced. She said her thighs have gotten thicker as the result of hard work in the gym. She stated, “I can’t help the fact that I look a certain way,” and also remarked, “I can’t remove my ‘fake bum implants.’ I’m not going to stop going to the gym to grow my thighs.”

                The plucky Pole indignantly added: “I’m not white white. I might be Polish but I’m not white white. I’m olive skin-toned and when I tan I might go a shade or two darker but it’s not dark dark.”

                The whole damn conversation is dumb dumb.

                What’s next, “whitefishing?” “Dykefishing?”

                Alicja likely just “identifies” as black. If anyone can identify as the opposite sex, anyone can sure as hell identify as a different skin color. It’s much easier—and less painful-- to make oneself look black or white…or yellow or brown, than it is to swap out genitalia and other obvious body parts and features. Look at Elizabeth Warren, for instance…not that you’d necessarily want to. She counts herself as a person of color even though she’s 1/1024^th some type of Indian. (I would prefer to say “Native American,” but we can’t even be sure of that according to the tests). In other words, she’s whiter than Bob Hope was.

                Question: what if a (white) transgender “woman” identifies as black, too? How hard will the liberal “Ignorati” come down on “her?” Will they be in a bit of a quandry or will it still be cut and dried—black and white—in their minds?

Rand Paul's "Festivus Waste Report" 2018

                As I write this, the U.S. government is supposedly “shut down.” This is fake news, as all essential government entities are 100% up and running, and everybody is getting paid. If this qualifies as a government shutdown, it would be better for the average American taxpayer if the government was permanently shut down. The bewildering array of extraneous things on which the government spends a staggering amount of money is largely kept from Joe Citizen’s view. Each year at this time, however, Senator Rand Paul issues a “Festivus Waste Report,” cataloging some of the most preposterous examples of taxpayer abuse. Here are a few of the low-lights from the 2018 report. (Keep in mind as you read this that the U.S. is currently over $21 trillion in debt).

·         Since 2009, the State Department has allocated over $76 million to provide stipends to the nearly non-existent Somali army. (It should be directing that money to our own nearly non-existent army).

·         The Department of Agriculture spent over $13 million to promote farmers’ markets. (Farmers are paid not to grow things, and are subsidized in various ways, including via the inane ethanol mandate. There are already Farmer’s markets at nearly every street corner, gas station and strip mall parking lot).

·         More than $250,000 was spent by the U.S. embassy in Rwanda to teach Rwandans how to lobby. (I don’t know how effective this could be. Perhaps they could lobby for more food or a better government, but they probably just lobby for more U.S. aid).

·         $75,691 was spent on the vital task of directing high-speed volumes of air (generated by leaf blowers) at lizards. (How much was spent to determine if the lizards enjoyed the blow-jobs?).

·         A mere $361,891 was spent on a study of horse and donkey hunting on the ancient Anatolian Peninsula. (Why? They’re not still hunting them, are they? And where the hell is/was the Anatolian Peninsula?).

·         Fully $18 million was spent in support of Egyptian tourism. (They have the bleeping pyramids…they don’t need the help. And the Nile. Maybe spend it on Baltimore, instead?).

·         The ever daft State Department shelled out $50,000 to pay for museum trips in Bosnia & Herzegovina…for Bosnians & Herzegovinians. (I’m pretty sure no other country is paying for Americans to go to the Smithsonian or the Baseball Hall of Fame).

·         The National Endowment for the Arts coughed up 15 Grand to find ways of using the theater to combat homelessness and poverty. (“Romeo, Romeo, wherefore art thou, Romeo? Are you homeless and poverty-stricken again? You can come live with us Capulets! Better still, you could become an actor! Wouldn’t that be grand, my Romeo?!”).

·         The State Department forked over $200,000 to put on plays in Afghanistan. (See above. I’m sure the warlords were delighted).

·         The State Department (again) spent over $653,000 to develop a Pashto-language television drama series for Afghans. (See above. Don’t Afghans have enough drama in their day-to-day lives?).

·         The State Department spent $35,000 to encourage people in the Republic of Congo to use local resources. (Think about it).

·         The State Department also laid out $200,000 to bring British student social justice activists to the United States. (We have too damn many of them here already. We should be a net exporter of social justice warriors. We should be placing tariffs on their import, not paying for them to come here).

·         The National Institute of Health (NIH) spent nearly $2.5 million to study daydreaming. (Too bad we didn’t just dream this. What a nightmare).

·         The NIH spent an incredible $800,000 to study the sex lives of quails high on cocaine. (This raises the question: WTF??!! What’s next, studying the mating habits of herons on heroine? The hook-up tactics of drunken water buffalo?).

    And on and on…..and on and on and on it goes, for thousands of line items, costing the average taxpayer thousands of dollars.

                The government spends money like a drunken sailor on shore leave. And it’s about to get worse, possibly much worse, when the Democrats take control of the House of Representatives.

                Look for the 2019 report to show that the State Department spent $50 million to import British social justice activists to lobby for the provision of free cocaine to horny quails who are watched by daydreaming lizards being assaulted by gusts from leaf blowers in a study to determine the study’s effects on Egyptian tourism and Rwandan lobbying efforts.

Great Quotes Quiz

                                                                Great Quotes Quiz

                As always, this site is about learning, so “let’s get after it, shall we?!” See if you can identify who was the issuer of the following famous quotes:

1)      ”There is no terror in the bang, only in the anticipation of it.”

a)       Bill Clinton

b)      Stormy Daniels

c)       Donald Trump

d)      George Lemaître

e)      Alfred Hitchcock

2)      ”Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac.”

a)       Bill Clinton

b)      Donald Trump

c)       Hillary Clinton

d)      Elmer Fudd

e)      Henry Kissinger

3)      ”A little learning is a dangerous thing.”

a)       Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

b)      Kyrsten Sinema

c)       Alexander Pope

d)      Beta O’Rourke

e)      Rachel Maddow

4)      “That government is best which governs least.”

a)       No one

b)      Thomas Jefferson

c)       James Madison

d)      Henry David Thoreau

e)      Rand Paul

5)      “It ain’t over till it’s over.”

a)       Hillary Clinton

b)      Yogi Berra

c)       Al Gore

d)      Brenda Snipes

e)      Every California Democrat Who Was Behind When Polls Closed 11/6/2018

6)      “There is nothing permanent except change.”

a)       Barack Obama

b)      Yogi Berra

c)       Heraclitus

d)      Confucius

e)      Nostradamus

7)      “We have nothing to fear but fear itself.”

a)       Stephen King

b)      Franklin Delano Roosevelt

c)       Winston Churchill

d)      Maxine Waters

e)      Bart Simpson

8)      “We shall never surrender!”

a)       Winston Churchill

b)      Robert Mueller

c)       President Trump

d)      Emperor Hirohito

e)      Bonnie & Clyde

9)      “You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time.”

a)       Bill Clinton

b)      Hillary Clinton

c)       Barack Obama

d)      Brenda Snipes

e)      Abraham Lincoln

10)   “Where’s the beef?!”

a)       Hillary Clinton

b)      Stormy Daniels

c)       Donald Trump

d)      Man duped into eating a tofu “burger”

e)      Clara Peller (1980s Wendy’s ad)

Answers: E, E, C, D, B, C, B, A, E, E

                                        MERRY CHRISTMAS!

Award Shows

                “Award season” is almost upon us. There are now so many award shows it’s hard to keep track of them: the Oscars, the Emmys, the Grammys, Screen Actors Guild (SAG) Awards, Critics Choice Awards, ESPYs and Golden Globes, just to name a few. (And Golden Globes are what you often see when actresses saunter down the red carpet in their expensive, low-cut dresses).

                It is abundantly clear that those in the entertainment industry love to ostentatiously celebrate themselves. Therefore, I think we need an award show for the award shows. Call it the EGO Awards, or EGOs. There would be a nearly endless list of possible awards, just the way the stars like it. For example:

                “And the award for the best leftist political diatribe during an acceptance speech goes to……Robert DeNiro!”

                “And the award for the most brazen virtue-signaling while hosting an award show goes to……Jimmy Kimmel!"

               "And to present the next award, here is Joy Behar, the star of ABC's Emmy-winning morning show, 'The View.'"

               "Thanks, Stephen. Before we get to the next award, I’d just like to say that Trump’s testicles should be cut off and fed to Brett Kavanaugh in the interest of tolerance, compassion and world peace. (Loud applause, many in the audience standing and cheering). Thank you, thank you! You know deep down we are all the same, everybody around the world, all the same! We all want the same things! (Even louder cheering and applause). And diversity is our biggest strength, right?! (Still louder cheering and applause. Everyone standing. Many weeping. Eventually, a chant breaks out, ‘f**k Trump, f**k Trump, f**k Trump!’). Thank you, good people! Right you are!

 “And now, the moment you’ve all been waiting for: the award for the most effective use of condescension towards deplorables in flyover country while presenting the award for the best portrayal of a marginalized, bisexual, mulatto, transgendered, transvestite atheist in Indie films goes to………”

                                                         [fade]

Vegan Mob Storms Brazilian Steakhouse

                An angry vegan gang, composed of protesters from Direct Action Everywhere, stormed a Brazilian steakhouse recently. The mob played recordings of cows being slaughtered as patrons dined. A DAE spokeswoman stated, “In a time where we are experiencing mass environmental destruction, largely due to our unsustainable and unethical food choices, it is paramount that we put our egos and selfishness aside and accept that we are all connected, we are all animals.”

                I doubt that the protesters would be pleased if pro-life members stormed their vegan restaurants or abortion clinics and played recordings of human babies being slaughtered for convenience. And who, exactly, must put their “egos and selfishness aside” and renounce their “unethical” choices? It only goes one way. “You must accept gay marriage, you must bake the gay couple a cake, you must accept abortion, you must allow transgenders in any bathroom or locker room they wish to use, you must accept that there are an infinite number of genders, you must not own guns, you must not say politically-incorrect things, you must provide us “safe spaces” on campus, you must not buy a big gas-guzzling vehicle, you must not smoke cigarettes (but we need to legalize marijuana!), you must not say “Merry Christmas,” we must ban the sale and use of plastic straws, you shouldn’t be allowed to buy a soft-drink in anything larger than 16-ounce cups, you must not eat meat…”

                It never stops. The left is always pushing, always nagging, always angry, always… right. Or so it thinks. Conservatives don’t kill human babies.

                The protesters left the restaurant after about 20 minutes and went outside to picket. Some carried anti-meat signs saying, “It’s not food, it’s violence.” Another sign read: “Viva! Are you a baby eater?” and sported profiles of small animals underneath the lettering.

                It is interesting that the DAE spokeswoman chose to say it is crucial “that we put our egos and selfishness aside and accept that we are all connected, we are all animals. How are animals connected in the wild? They eat each other, that’s how. That’s called an “ecosystem.” Even if one doesn’t believe in the Biblical idea that man was given dominion over the Earth’s flora and fauna, it doesn’t take a scientist to see that Mother Nature’s plan is for everything to devour everything else. Even after a body is dead.

                So, Direct Action Everywhere dumbass hypocrites, go cut up and puree innocent fruits and vegetables. But, wait a minute, doesn’t agriculture, in and of itself, strip the very soil of precious nutrients and further deplete our rapidly dwindling supplies of clean water?

                I’m going to have my steak and eat it too. If DAE members have a beef with that, they can run for their safe spaces.

               

Christmas 2018: Climate Change Carols!

                Sadly, the devolution of Christian churches continues apace. Some in Australia have teamed up to fight climate change by singing rewritten carols this Christmas season. The Pitt Street Uniting Church, for example, can be seen and—unfortunately—heard singing their revised version of “Joy to the World” online:

                Cool down the world, the time has come, for targets tight and fair

                Let petrol, oil, and coal, prepare to go

                Let’s fund renewables

                Let’s fund renewables

                Let’s fund, let’s fund renewables

               

   The birth of Christ and eternal life vs. funding renewables…pretty much on par. Joy to the world, wind power is here!

   Except that investing in “green” energy is costing cities, states and taxpayers lots of money. Take Georgetown, Texas, for instance, a city ironically lauded in Al Gore’s movie “Inconvenient Truth.” An attempt to utilize wind and solar power to supply this small town with all its energy needs ended up costing the burg nearly $7 million. But I digress.

  PSUC’s own website describes its congregation as a “progressive faith community of justice-seeking friends,” while something called the Australian Religious Response to Climate Change (ARRCC? They’re gathering up the consonants two by two, apparently) assembled a songbook called “Carols Against Coal.” This new songbook is perhaps not as devout as traditional ones, as, in place of “O Come All Ye Faithful,” “Away in a Manger” and “Hark! The Herald Angels Sing,” it features “O Come All Ye Miners,” “Away in a Coal Mine” and “Hush! Our Solar Panels Sit.” There is also, apparently, a cutesy climate change version of “Silent Night.” I didn’t have the stomach to listen to or read the lyrics to that one.

  Said the leftists to the GOP
  Do you see what we see?
  Reaching towards the sky, GOP
  Do you see what we see?
  A plant, a plant
  Smoking in plain sight!
  With a stack that’s tall and a blight
  With a stack that’s tall and a blight

  Said the Democrats to the country rubes
  Do you fear what we fear?
  (Do you fear what we fear)?
  Coming by-and-by country rubes
  Do you fear what we fear?
  (Do you fear what we fear)?
  The heat, the heat!
  Warming up the seas
  Bringing us flooding and disease
  Bringing us flooding and disease

  Said the Democrats to conservatives
  You don’t know what we know

  (You don’t know what we know)

  Clinging to your God and your guns
  You don’t know what we know
  (You don’t know what we know)
  It’s mild, It’s mild!
  It’s nowhere near as cold
  You must quit all mining when told
  You must quit all mining when told

Rogue Organs

            Headline: “Lab-grown organs ‘go rogue’ and develop BRAIN and MUSCLE cells”

Miniature kidneys, created and grown in laboratory test tubes, suddenly started forming brain and muscle cells recently. The kidney “organoids” began behaving in a completely unexpected way, the Daily Star reported, as scientists expected them to form different kinds of kidney cells. (That seems like a reasonable assumption, I must admit). “Experts” believe that the study’s findings imply that the method used by researchers is actually creating other types of cells. That is a pretty good assumption, since that is exactly what occurred. Thanks, experts!

Benjamin Humphreys, the director of the Division of Nephrology at the Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, said scientists haven’t really learned that organoid cells may not mirror the behavior of human cells and therefore may produce different results. Thanks, Dr. Humphreys, for that cogent analysis of what obviously transpired if the reports are accurate. He stated that he believes somewhere between 10 and 20 per cent of the cells in the experiment missed their cue to develop into kidney cells but added that slight tweaks should make it possible to block the rogue cells from sprouting.

Missed their cue?! We’re not talking about an actress who was late to her lines. What we need to learn is that we shouldn’t be playing God and attempting to create life from scratch by playing around with genetic material, Bunsen burners and test tubes. We should no longer be surprised if one day we walk into the lab to find out that what we thought would be a nice little Chia Pet of a kidney grew a brain, sprouted arms like Popeye, smashed the laboratory’s window, and sidled off to Chick-fil-a for a bite to eat.  

“Something wrong, Dr. Frankenstein?”

“No! There’s nothing to see here!”