Laur Lore

New Info on Area 51 seems Fishy

2009-04-12T21:58:00.008-04:00

Would you expect any military base, let alone the infamous Area 51, to be the “most boring” place you could ever work? Don’t they get to play with ET and fly spaceships? Or at least know what really happened in Roswell in 1947?

Not so much according to Thorton “T.D.” Barnes, former special-projects engineer at Area 51 in Nevada.

Actually, he says what people thought were alien-piloted UFOs in the 1960's were really spy planes being tested at over 2,000 miles per hour at altitudes of 90,000 feet, which would produce flashes of light high in the sky.

"We considered it to be a bonus. They [the UFO sightings] made it easier to conceal what we were doing," says Barnes.

While it's true that most reported UFO sightings really can be identified, I still have some questions about this random admittance of “truth:”

Why come out with it half a century later?

If the military at Area 51 was using the idea of UFOs and aliens as a cover-up for something else, how odd/questionable/bad must that something else be?

Is this just another cover-up?

(Image: Strangely hilarious, although I'm not sure if it's real. From GreyFalcon.us.)

5 Worst Proven Conspiracies

2009-04-05T20:32:00.016-04:00

When you hear the word "conspiracy" what do you think of? Traitors? Crazy nuts? Mel Gibson?

In most cases, the first assumption is correct.

A conspiracy is defined as:

An agreement between two or more persons to perform together an illegal, wrongful, or subversive act, as if by sinister design.

But conspiracies aren't always bad; an example of a "good" conspiracy would be the the Underground Railroad. On the other hand, because conspiracies are based on lies and deceit, they're usually so disgusting, terrible, and just plain wrong that they need to be kept secret to prevent public outrage - and to keep the lie going.

Here are 5 of the worst.

(Not to sound like a stereotypical conspiracy nut with tin foil on my head, but isn't it strange that most of these involve a government of some sort?)

Smallpox-Infected Blankets given to Aboriginals

Jeffrey Amherst was the Commander-in-Chief of the British Army mid-18th century, and is also believed to be responsible for purposely giving smallpox-infected blankets to American Indians, an early form of germ warfare.

Some people are skeptical about these stories, while others assert that the infected blankets were not intentionally distributed to the Indians, or that Lord Jeff himself is not to blame.

Two hard-to-read letters , however, suggest not only that it happened, but that it was intentional, and that Amherst was responsible – assuming, of course, the letters are authentic:

Colonel Henry Bouquet to General Amherst (13 July 1763) suggests in a postscript the distribution of blankets to "inocculate the Indians"

Amherst to Bouquet (16 July 1763) approves this plan in a postscript and suggests "to try Every other method that can serve to Extirpate this Execrable Race."

(Image: Nativeweb.org)

“The Protocols of the Elders of Zion”

The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is an anti-Semitic forgery claiming an elaborate plot of Jewish world domination. It was first privately printed in 1897 and was first made public in Russia in 1905, when Nicholas II and his secret police distributed the work and presented it as true.

It was later published in 1920 in a Michigan newspaper started by Henry Ford mainly to attack Jews and Communists. Ford even wrote a book that was heavily influenced by the text —The International Jew: The World's Foremost Problem.

Adolf Hitler later used the Protocols to help justify his attempt to exterminate Jews during World War II.

The Protocols have been deemed a hoax for decades, and yet many parts of the world are still taking it as fact and using it to foster anti-Semitism. (Similar to claims that Jews made up the Holcaust.)

(Image: NYTimes.com)

Tuskegee Experiments

Beginning in 1932, the U.S. Public Health Service conducted an experiment on 399 black men who were unknowingly suffering from syphilis. The men were never treated for the disease, but their symptoms and the progression of the disease was studied.

(Experimenters wanted to see how blacks and whites reacted differently to syphilis, but whites were not part of the study.)

By the end of the experiment, 28 of the men had died directly of syphilis, 100 died of related complications, 40 of their wives had been infected, and 19 of their children had been born with congenital syphilis.

Even when penicillin was discovered in the 1940s—the first real cure for syphilis— the study participants were deliberately denied the medication

The experiments ended 40 years later when the story finally broke in the Washington Star on July 25, 1972.

(Image: Brown.edu)

Project MKULTRA

MKULTRA was the code name for a covert CIA mind-control and chemical interrogation research program, run by the Office of Scientific Intelligence. The program began in the early 1950s, continuing at least through the late 1960s - although some argue it’s still being done - and used United States citizens as its test subjects.

These are just some of the other disturbing aims of the CIA’s mind-altering substance studies, aside from creating manchurian candidates:

Substances which will promote illogical thinking and impulsiveness to the point where the recipient would be discredited in public.
Substances which will enhance the ability of individuals to withstand privation, torture and coercion during interrogation and so-called "brain-washing".
A material which…in very small amounts will make it impossible for a man to perform any physical activity whatsoever.

Another study of MKULTRA was Operation Midnight Climax - and yes, it was just as perverted as it sounds. Women (prostitutes on the CIA payroll) lured men to apartment hideaways in New York City and San Francisco. They then fed them LSD or marijuana while experimenters watched through two-way mirrors and recorded the sounds.

(Image: Anomalyarchives.org)

Abu Ghraib Torture and Media Manipulation

In 2004 images began to surface of the abuse, torture, sodomy, and murder of prisoners at Abu Ghraib in Iraq in a news report on CBS’s Sixty Minutes II, acts that were committed by personnel of the United States Army.

Then in 2007, long-time CBS Evening News anchor Dan Rather filed a $70 million lawsuit against CBS and Viacom for wrongfully terminating his employment.

With nothing to lose, Rather accused CBS management of sitting on the Abu Ghraib story, the evidence for which was discovered in early 2004 by Mary Mapes, a producer for 60 Minutes II with over 20 years experience.

To top it all off, Rather claimed CBS refrained from publicizing the story to appease the Bush administration, which was, according to Rather, a regular occurrence at CBS.

(Image: Crooksandliars.com)

A Piece of Advice (rant) to Experimental Bloggers

2009-04-03T16:50:00.011-04:00

Okay, so I’m trying to create a new blog and I’ve been attempting all the Blogger URLs that I might like to use. But, of course, they’re all taken.

Even worse, these people either a) haven’t posted anything since five + years ago, b) only have one post that was made five + years ago, or c) simply made a “test” page.

I’m not really “enraged” that people set up these accounts with the hope of keeping up with them, but come on. One post? A test page?

Please, if you’re experimenting with blogging, or just making a pointless test page, choose a pointless URL. Pick something no one else would ever want, like “ilovehitler.blogspot.com,” or just “testpage.blogspot.com.” (I don’t know if those are taken, but I don’t think anyone would want to pick them anyway – unless someone actually did make a test page and called it “testpage,” in which case that’s okay.) Besides, you can always change it later.

Or, if after some test posts you decide blogging isn’t for you, change the URL to something ridiculous.

It’s not a huge deal that every URL I want to use is already in “use,” but it’s annoying enough that, ironically enough, I had to blog about it.

Conficker Update (Still not sure if it's a Hoax)

2009-04-02T11:21:00.009-04:00

April 1st has come and gone and the crafty Conficker virus has yet to have the catastrophic Y2K effect experts anticipated. Will something happen today? Tomorrow? The day after tomorrow?

Still, no one knows. I’m starting to think this whole Conficker thing really is a hoax, a scam created by all those anti-virus companies to scare people into buying their products.

Or, maybe the fake security software getting picked up by search engines IS the next phase of Conficker:

Scammers game Google’s search engine by creating Web sites full of search terms. Another tactic is spamming high-traffic Web sites that lead back to their malicious site in order to drive their Web site up the search ranks.

The fake security software Web sites will ask a user to download a file that scans a machine for malware. The software usually tells the user the PC has malicious software even if it isn’t infected. The software will then badger the user to buy the questionable security program (from Information Security Resources).

(Is it just me, or does this kind of sound like all the news reports badgering people to install Norton and the like?)

My half-assed conspiracy theory aside, as long as you're fearful of other viruses and already have your computer protected, you should be safe from this one too.

(Image:ABC News)

The New Thing: Ghost-Twittering

2009-04-01T14:17:00.004-04:00

You’ve probably heard about ghostwriting, especially when it comes to super-long novels, which, let’s face it, takes a lot of precious time.

But Twittering? That’s like, what? A sentence?

Even so, celebrities aren’t doing it. So if you’re following the tweets of 50 Cent, John Mayer, Kanye West, or Britney Spears, you’re really getting tweeted by “hired ghosts”.

In fact, some of these celebs don’t even like Twitter. (“Like” is a nice way of putting it.)

This is what John Mayer said to Marc Malkin of E!:

Twitter is "inherently silly and it's inherently dumb...If you really think that Twitter is the pathway to spiritual enlightenment, well...it's one step away from sending pictures of your poop."

I can’t help but laugh, but I bet his 400,000 followers are pissed.

You Fool! 3 Funny Pranks on the Public

2009-04-01T13:15:00.002-04:00

My whole plan was to make up some completely absurd story about the origin of April Fools’ Day, but since I’m not very good at pranks, and not really a big fan of pranks being played on me, I decided not to pull your leg.

Instead, I picked some of the funniest practical jokes that actually did play out according to the Museum of Hoaxes. Geez, people sure are gullible:

Virgin Cola’s Blue Cans

1996: Virgin Cola announced that in the interest of consumer safety it had integrated a new technology into its cans. When the cola passed its sell-by date, the liquid would react with the metal in the can, turning the can itself bright blue. Virgin warned that consumers should therefore avoid purchasing all blue cans. The joke was that Pepsi had recently unveiled its newly designed bright blue cans.

The Left-Handed Whopper

1998: Burger King published a full page advertisement in USA Today announcing the introduction of a "Left-Handed Whopper.” According to the advertisement, the new Whopper included the same ingredients as the original, but all the condiments were rotated 180 degrees. Thousands of customers had gone into restaurants to request the new sandwich, as well as the 'right handed' version." (Kind of reminds me of the new Diamond Shreddies.)

The Case of the Interfering Bras

1982: The Daily Mail reported that a local manufacturer had sold 10,000 "rogue bras.” According to the article, the support wire in these bras had been made out of a kind of copper that produced static electricity, which was interfering with local television and radio broadcasts. The chief engineer of British Telecom immediately ordered that all his female laboratory employees disclose what type of bra they were wearing.

You can also click here for this year's hoaxes, or here if you like cruel jokes. Don’t worry; you won't be judged.

Forgot about Earth Hour / Earth in General

2009-03-30T22:37:00.002-04:00

After reading The Post Script and That's What She Said today, I realized I completely forgot about Earth Hour on Saturday, and as a result, didn't participte.

While I try to be earth-friendly everyday, what I've been hearing from some people (even one if my professors), is that the Earth is doomed anyway.

Over the last 50 years especially, with billions of people, millions of cars, mass production, and everyday waste, I'm well aware that we've vandalized our planet.

But it's hard for me to beleive that it can't be saved. Maybe that's not even it; maybe Earth just won't be saved. That I can believe.

No matter how much we recycle, I'm not sure the other two R's are part of the current equation.

We don't want to give up the luxuries, the conveniences, the habits that we've grown up with, even though we know what they're doing. And I'm not talking about idiotic things like leaving the water running full blast after washing your hands, like this one girl I caught in a restaurant bathroom. (I had to turn it off because she just walked out. Who does that?!)

No, no. I'm talking about things you're used to and might not even realize.

Have you ever had to take a cold shower because someone else used up the hot water? What about when you go camping and have to skip showers?

Have you ever experienced a black-out and couldn't figure out what to do to pass the time because everything you do and use is electronic?

Have you ever had to catch your own dinner or face going without it?

Do you remember the days before you could drive and had to walk everywhere?

Would you want to do stuff like that all the time? I wouldn't; I'm not going to lie - and those are only a few minor changes. And you can also be damn sure big companies like Coca-Cola and Nike wouldn't want to limit production or their use of third-world labour.

I don't want this to be all doom and gloom, but if we really want to make a difference, we have to do things differently - and that doesn't just mean buying green and turning everything off for one hour a year.

But I guess, as they say, you have to start somewhere...

But I Love my Gun!

2009-03-30T16:53:00.013-04:00

OMG Obama wants to take away the Second Amendment! What are we going to do?

I’ll be doing nothing, being Canadian and all, but Americans in general and the National Rifle Association in particular definitely aren’t happy about Obama’s relatively recent support for banning assault weapons, so says The New York Times and many others.

By strange coincidence, or just plain strangeness, this concern has caused gun lovers to start loading up on even more weapons; gun-makers Smith & Wesson's order backlog now stands at $48 million, making them believe their revenue will double in the next three years.

Am I crazy, or are guns really that important?

Some people, like Big Brother Crusher thinks so:

“I can't believe Obama! Obama is a silver tongue dirty snake. Why does this worthless sob want to take away my firearms? The second amendment was put in place as a checks and balance to big government. Which is exactly why Obama wants to take away a persons right to bear arms.”

And Katrina S argues,

“No one has a right to take away guns, gun control is a way of dissarming the people so they can't build a resisitence against the gov't. Its your right carry it and if anyone tries to take that away from you don't feel discouraged. They will meet some heavy resistence in the center of the country. I suggest he keeps his agenda in the bi-costal areas, if he wants to avoid a full scale war.”

It seems the people who are so keen on guns are the ones who supported a government that probably should have been overthrown.

Furthermore, when someone says gun control is bad because it takes away the people’s ability to resist government, they basically say guns are the be-all and end-all of government resistance. Ever heard of peaceful measures down there?

And if anyone tries to take your gun there will be a full-scale war? What the F will that do besides amp up America's pro-war image even more?

As for the "silver tongue" comment, Obama didn't even lie when he said he wouldn't ban guns; he HAS mentioned limiting CERTAIN gun rights:

“...a lot of law-abiding citizens use it for hunting, for sportsmanship, and for protecting their families. We also have a violence on the streets that is the result of illegal handgun usage.

And so I think there is nothing wrong with a community saying we are going to take those illegal handguns off the streets...We can have reasonable, thoughtful gun control measure that I think respect the Second Amendment and people’s traditions.”

Maybe it’s because I’m a Canadian (who has never held a gun or seen one other than in its holster on a police officer) that I don’t understand the importance of gun ownership.

And yeah, you could say, “Guns don’t kill people. People kill people.”

But isn’t it a problem that guns make it way easier?

Go here for stats on gun-related deaths and comparisons between Canada and US stats.

Paranormal 2.0

2009-03-30T14:45:00.009-04:00

You've heard of web 2.0, but what about paranormal 2.0?

This new phrase created by ParanormalKnowledge.com refers to:

"...the rejuvenation and evolution revolving around the paranormal. Until now, the paranormal has been understated, thought of as negative, and unrepresented...

We are taking the word paranormal to a whole new level. More categories, articles, interviews, and videos are on the way to help reshape the world’s view of the paranormal community."

If you have any interest in the paranormal, the unexplained, superstitions, history, world issues, and/or debating any of the above, check it out!

Conficker Virus a Hoax?

2009-03-29T21:47:00.011-04:00

In case you haven't heard the hundreds of news reports or from one of your techie friends (as I just did this weekend), there’s a computer virus going around that, from what I can gather, is really really bad.

So potentially harmful, in fact, that Microsoft has offered a $250,000 bounty on the heads of the jerks who created it, and who have already infected millions of computers.

The Conficker virus is set to activate on April 1st and, as if this already doesn't feel like Y2K all over again, no one knows what's going to happen.

Here's why this virus is so frightening. (I'll use direct quotes since I’m not too good with explaining computer stuff):

Conficker is the latest example of a type of malware called a botnet, which gives a cybercriminal control over an infected computer. The criminal can steal information stored on the computer or make it do things like send spam emails...

What sets Conficker apart is that it’s more sophisticated than any previous piece of malware. It uses a new form of cryptography, can be controlled by criminals in multiple ways, and updates itself.

...the bad guys haven’t done anything with the computers they control yet, which means they could do, well, anything.

Anything?

"Perhaps in the best case, Conficker may be used as a sustained and profitable platform for massive Internet fraud and theft.

In the worst case, Conficker could be turned into a powerful offensive weapon for performing concerted information warfare attacks that could disrupt not just countries, but the Internet itself. (Globe and Mail)

But now some experts are saying there’s nothing to worry about...as long as you don't click on pop-ups and regularly do anti-virus and Windows updates. But even so, we won't really know until April 1st.

To make me even more paranoid until then, while looking all this up I also came across I site warning that searching “Conficker” could put your computer at a greater risk of getting it. Super...

But whether all this an April Fools’ prank or the real deal, I have to wonder why people create these viruses in the first place. Are they greedy? Lonely? Ingenious? Or some hideous combination of the three?

P.S. Virus-makers I may have insulted just now, please don't ruin my computer!

Psychics "Help" during Recession

2009-03-28T18:02:00.007-04:00

It’s tough finding a job in these hard times. How about trying your hand at psychiatry? I don’t mean psychology; I’m talking about predicting the future.

The psychic business is up, and the topic is money.

So it looks like now’s the perfect time to open your own business charging people $10 to tell them the economy is in a slump.

"I don't think really the economy is gonna pick up for another two years," says Sherry Starr, a psychic whose business has gone up 50% since September.

But don’t worry. Starr offers some helpful advice that you can’t get from your friends and family:

"What about a job change? A job change is in your cycle right now."

and

"I see more success for you. More changes.”

Paula Whittle, one of Starr’s customers says the reading will have a positive effect on her economic decisions: "I will probably be more cautious with my spending the rest of the year."

I see...a waste of $10.

(Image: The Love Psychic.)

CBC Cuts: "Hardly a Meltdown"

2009-03-26T15:00:00.016-04:00

This is a repost of a Toronto Sun article:

Despite the sorry news that the CBC is cutting 799 jobs...it's still getting $1.1 billion a year. Hardly a melt-down...

Mr. Lacroix defends running U.S. game shows on grounds that they attract viewers and advertising. Now he says the Corp has to sell $125 million in assets to alleviate the shortfall...

Executive salaries have already been frozen, so maybe the 50% cut in bonuses now will be trimmed to 100%. Why are bonuses necessary when execs are already well-paid?

...Acknowledging that she had no inside knowledge about CBC layoffs or cutbacks, Ms. [Carole] Taylor [former chairman of the CBC (2001-05), and a former B.C. finance minister (2005-08)] said she opposed importing U.S. game shows and felt the CBC should 'not be going for ratings but providing a service that cannot be found anywhere else.'

...Lord knows, private broadcasting won't do it."

I just want to point out that there are Canadian-made shows on the CBC that I and other people actually do like to watch (besides Hockey Night in Canada, obviously):

As for what to do with the other 20 or so hours of the day, here are my thoughts:

If the CBC doesn’t have the money or advertising to draw in a huge audience, that pretty much affirms its position as a public broadcaster. And what’s wrong with that?

The CBC doesn’t have the constraints of the privately-owned networks (pleasing advertisers mostly), so it can really be a place for fun and experimentation.

There are a ton of things the CBC could do, and perhaps, should have done, as a public broadcaster. Here's one: How about giving time slots to the public?

Got a garage band you want to showcase? Written a screenplay you would like to see come to life? Want to practice reporting skills by doing your own story on a Canadian person/event/issue?

It could be like YouTube for TV; public broadcasting for...public broadcasting.

This might actually get people to tune in more, if they, as the Canadian public, can make contributions to what’s considered “Canadian content.”

And Wheel of Fortune sucks anyway. What were they thinking?

Share your thoughts!

Poll Results: Bigfoot is a No-Show

2009-03-26T13:28:00.010-04:00

Of all the 11 people who took my poll, no one believes in Bigfoot!

Let’s explore some possible reasons why...

The Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization cites thousands of reports of possible sightings or “vocalizations” of Sasquatch, Bigfoot, or in simpler terms, a “large, hairy, humanlike creature.”

Hmm, that sounds like it could be my friend’s dad, some guy I once saw at the bus stop, or a Star Wars character.

Maybe it’s not so much that people don’t believe in Bigfoot, but that it’s not that crazy of an idea. Big deal? There’s so many species of animal out there that the elusive Bigfoot could just be another one, or something in the early stages of human evolution – which would be pretty cool.

Plus, anyone can just put on a Chewbacca costume and walk around in the woods.

Then again, some say there’s a connection between Bigfoot and UFOs, which, according to the poll, are even more believable than God.

Hilarious Twitter Video

2009-03-26T00:21:00.005-04:00

Having not jumped on the Twitter train (try saying that 5 times fast!), I sometimes feel like I'm missing out on something really important and special.

Then I find a video like this...

The End of Mass Media? Again?

2009-03-24T16:32:00.015-04:00

Let me begin with a little excerpt from The Simpsons since it always seems to apply so well to real life:

BROADCASTER: On our panel is a porn star, a physics professor, a robotics engineer, a make-up artist, and...a print journalist?

NELSON: Ha ha! You’re medium is dying!

I don’t know if I listed the non-print journalist professions correctly, but what matters here is the idea that print is dying. And not just print; the CBC’s documentary The End, suggests even TV and radio might also be meeting their untimely demise – or timely; whatever way you look at it.

The truth is I would rather hold a book in my hands than read off a screen; then again, I don’t see the point of a computer without the internet. And I don’t listen to the radio. (When I worked in an office 2 summers ago, the same radio station was always on, and they played the same 10 songs 3 times a day every day. I’m not even exaggerating.)

What I think The End is getting at isn’t necessarily that radio, TV, and print are dying, but changing. The documentary called it an “evolution of choice.”

We don’t have to wait for our favourite shows or songs to come on, a decision made primarily by broadcasters and advertisers.

On that note, one of the most interesting things from the documentary is the idea of “conversation vs. consumption.”

Thanks to video on demand and TiVo, we can just fast-forward through commercials; with the internet, we can search for what we want, and make contributions to the content ourselves in however way we choose, which is usually honestly and without restraint.

I also want to mention something that was said aboutWikipedia - the idea that it’s “killing encyclopedias.” That, I’d have to disagree with because like radio, TV, and print, the same information will just move to another format.

Other complaints are that Wikipedia isn’t always accurate because anyone can add to it; that too I disagree with.

Wikipedia is a shared space. If someone makes something up and posts it, it'll get caught because everyone has access to it, making it more reliable in some ways.

Wikipedia’s contributors don’t have advertisers to please or government riding their butts to keep certain things out, like mainstream information-disseminating networks. It’s also free and easily-updated, whereas as the expensive traditional leather-bound versions are a little more difficult to add to.

Plus, finding what you want on Wikipedia is fast and can be done from anywhere with a cell phone – which apparently 815 million people bought last year. (As an added bonus, Wikipedia doesn't weigh a hundred pounds.)

The end of radio, TV, and print? Not likely. We’re more likely looking at the end of long attention spans. Hey, a bird!

Jon Stewart Gets Serious

2009-03-24T12:36:00.007-04:00

Last night, I saw an episode of The Daily Show that really wasn’t that funny. (I think it originally aired on the 12th, but since this is Canada, maybe it was delayed?)

Jon Stewart let 'er tip on Jim Cramer, host of CNBC’s Mad Money, calling out the host, the show, and the entire company for not doing what they’re supposed to be doing as, 1) a news network,and 2) a news network that markets itself as having trustworthy answers to people's financial worries.

The best part was that Cramer couldn’t do or say anything about it other than shrug his shoulders and act like a suck-up. So I guess it was funny in an I-don’t-believe-this-is-actually-happening kind of way.

I can see the headlines now:

“Money Matters Fails: Jon Stewart Takes Down Another Mainstream News Program”

Go here to watch the full episode: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3

Colbert wins NASA Room-Naming Contest!

2009-03-23T20:44:00.005-04:00

Congrats, NASA.

You opened a write-in poll to name a new room in your famous space station only to get the result you least wanted: Colbert (as in the host of Comedy Central's Colbert Report, Stephen Colbert).

That’s right! Colbert!

Only question is: Will they use it?

Obama's "Special" Comment

2009-03-23T19:12:00.006-04:00

Last Thursday when Barack Obama appeared on The Tonight Show, he said something he probably shouldn’t have.

What a lot of the criticism seems to be (from YouTube comments anyway) is that if Bush had said what Obama said about the Special Olympics, there would be so many complaints and he would be impeached and blah blah blah.

Well, guess what? Obama isn’t Bush and people are still complaining. And considering the things Bush has done and said during his 8 year reign, what’s a comment like that gonna do? Besides, there’s a reason we know exactly what Bushisms are.

Oddly enough, it looks like Obama fans don’t really care about his Special Olympics comment, whereas Obama haters (and who I think must be Bush lovers) do - not to mention everyone involved with the Special Olympics.

Let me just get it out there so there's no confusion: I'm a way bigger fan of Obama than Bush, so I'm going to defend Obama now by saying he made a mistake. Everyone makes mistakes, right? (It's not like he invaded a country or anything.)

Then again, I guess not everyone says insulting, prejudiced things on Leno, and obviously not everyone is the President of the United States - who based his entire campaign on Change no less. But Obama’s strategy from the beginning was to present himself as this regular, everyday person in America who everday people could identify with.

Is he just continuing on with that strategy, acting like the average Joe by unwittingly saying things that could offend people? (One of the big ones that comes to mind, and one I’m sure most of us has said at least once and heard at least a hundred times, is “that’s so gay.”) That said, is he just making an example out of himself?

Do you think the Special Olympics comment will affect Obama’s image?
Were you upset by his comment?
Do you even think it’s a big deal?

Will “Obamaisms” become the new thing? (If they do, I bet one of them would be, "We are facing a time of crisis." Not that he's wrong; he just seems to say it a lot.)

City in the Sea: The Venus Project

2009-03-23T14:57:00.010-04:00

The future is sea bound!

The Venus Project, founded nearly 50 years ago by 93-year-old social engineer, futurist, architect, and idealist Jacque Fresco, is still one of the coolest (and dare I say, best) ideas for the future of human life.

This is what it's about:

The Venus Project presents a vision not of what the future will be, but what it can be if we apply what we already know in order to achieve a sustainable new world civilization.

It calls for a straightforward redesign of our culture in which the age-old problems of war, poverty, hunger, debt, and unnecessary human suffering are viewed not only as avoidable, but as totally unacceptable.

Anything less will result in a continuation of the same catalog of problems found in today’s world.”

That's some good theorizing. But how long do you think it would take for it to become a reality?

Warning: No Journalists Allowed

2009-03-22T18:53:00.010-04:00

A Canadian journalist who was kidnapped in Pakistan last November, and is still being held hostage for US $375,000 (although some reports say $2 million), said this is a new video made by her captors:

"I am going to be beheaded just like the Polish engineer [Peter Stanczak], probably by the end of the month. The deadline is by the end of March, and that's basically, I don't know, 18 days or 16 days.”

"I'm not quite sure how long that is but the time is very short and my life is going to end."

Beverly Giesbrecht converted to Islam after the 9/11 attacks and now runs Jihad Unspun, a website which claims to provide "a clear view of the U.S. war on 'terrorism'" and information that is "devoid of the constraints of mainstream media." She now prefers to be called Khadija Abdul Qahaar (although many of the articles on her kidnapping use her former name).

These are some of the harsh comments from a CTV article and a Globe and Mail article on the video’s release. There weren’t many on each (only 10 comments all together), but there seemed to be a trend towards blaming Qahaar for her own kidnapping:

George
As a journalist she put herself in harms way in order to obtain a story that would be considered a scoop. She knew the risks that she was taking what the consequences would be should she be captured, hoping that she could beat the odds, and collect a sizeable payment for doing so. Now that she has been kidnapped the expectation is for our federal government to come to the rescue at great expense to the taxpayers and to negotiate with her captors for her release. She took her chances and lost,end of story. it was her own doing.

GDR
As a journalist, she has put herself in harms way and has become an author of her own misfortune. I would not pay any ransom as that encourages other pseudo journalists to act so irresponsibly.

Alysha
…this woman put herself in harms way for the sake of writing a story and being a journalist! Actions like this sometimes have consequences and now the people are expected to bail her by paying a ransom. Another load unto the taxpayers!

Eat Your Weedies
I am sad for her. It's tough to watch someone plead for their life. However, it's also sad to watch a fool make foolhardy decisions. She had no business going there in the first place. Whatever her name, she's a blond Canadian dealing with illiterate, ignorant, hot heads.

Bill Williams
Bye Bye Babe. You made the decision to go there, now suffer the consequences. Bad choice on your part, but, hey, that's the type of decisions idealist bleeding hearts make. Why should the rest of us be responsible for her well being.

Of course the woman had a choice not to go to such a dangerous area, but blaming her for getting herself kidnapped just for a story isn’t only an insult to her, but to journalists who actually are willing to report from such dangerous areas, Stanczak, the engineer who was kidnapped for ransom in September 2008 and murdered by Pakistani Taliban last month (the key word here is engineer, not journalist), and the area's citizens, who are also victims of these kidnappings and executions.

Blaming Qahaar for going somewhere she knew was dangerous also ignores the idea that because it is so dangerous it almost necessitates journalists going there to expose exactly what’s happening.

Isn’t that was journalists do?

When a firefighter is killed on the job, no one says, “Oh well, he knew what he was getting into.” Definitely not. I realize there might be more of an immediate need to put out fires, but why is it different for journalists when they're harmed or killed for doing their job? Isn't the truth important too?

As some of the commentators already mentioned, Qahaar knew the stakes and is now asking for help from them, which I guess seems contradictory.

But to just say the hell with her doesn’t make us (“the innocent taxpayers”) any less “ignorant” or criminal than those who are literally holding her life in their hands. It also gives me a sick feeling in my stomach.

UFOs over Big Ben...or Trick of Light?

2009-03-20T11:51:00.014-04:00

A picture of 4 UFOs flying over London, published yesterday in the UK’s Telegraph, has already gotten a lot of people (meaning bloggers) talking about the photo’s authenticity.

Derek Burdon, who took the photo from the roof top of Orion House in Covent Garden, said he didn’t even notice the shapes while he was taking it. It was only after, when he was looking through his camera, that he saw them. For the skeptics, Burdon was sure to make that clear:

"I have not tampered with it and you would not be able to fake it. It was taken on my mobile and I guess I am just lucky to have it. These shapes were not visible to the naked eye so it's not as if I was looking for them."

What quite a few people – but especially UFO believers – are saying is that the “UFOs” in this photo are just reflections of the room lights against the window.

I don’t really know what to think about this one. I believe in UFOs, but I also believe in Photoshop and other possible explanations. Still, I can’t picture someone doctoring a UFO photo and giving it to a newspaper with their name unless they actually believed it was real. People do it though. Damn you photo pranksters!

But, oddly enough, London is a hotspot for UFO sightings anyway. According to the BBC, the number of reported UFO sightings in 2008 had almost doubled since the year before.

Another UFO photo (new word: UFOtograph?), this one from a year ago and published in The Sun – and referred to in my post, “There’s No Such Thing as a UFO” – is so clear that it looks like a movie still or something.

I don’t know if that makes the photo less believable or the movies more accurate.

New SciFi Name is Lame, Angers Twitterers

2009-03-19T16:27:00.011-04:00

This just in: the SciFi Channel is changing its name.

It still sounds exactly the same, but the boring I's have been replaced by more trendy Y’s, making it...SyFy.

Why, you may ask, is the brilliant reason behind this change?

“The name Sci Fi has been associated with geeks and dysfunctional, antisocial boys in their basements with video games and stuff like that, as opposed to the general public and the female audience in particular...

We spent a lot of time in the ’90s trying to distance the network from science fiction, which is largely why it’s called Sci-Fi."

(Yeah, because “Sci-Fi” sounds nothing like a shorter version of “Science Fiction,” and “Syfy” sounds nothing like “Sci-Fi.”)

“We [the mega-corporation that owns this channel] really do want to own the imagination space. We want to get the credit for the range of content that we already have on our air and that we’ll be doing more of in the future.

When we tested this new name, the thing that we got back from our 18-to-34 techno-savvy crowd, which is quite a lot of our audience, is actually this is how you’d text it...

We’ll get the heritage and the track record of success, and we’ll build off of that to build a broader, more open and accessible and relatable and human-friendly brand.”

Hey, I’m a human! I’ll definitely start watching SyFy!

By taking the science fiction out of Sci-Fi NBC Universal hopes to broaden its brand to appeal to greater audiences, while simultaneously insulting all of its original fans.

It looks like Twitterers aren’t too happy about the name change either. (Twitterers: the “techno-savvy” demographic that supposedly influenced the name change in the first place.)

tewha: BREAKING NEWS: Sci Fi to skip SyFy name, go directly to "Channel nobody watches."

mebobyounot: Sci Fi channel is now SyFy? Sounds way to close to Syfylis/syhphilis

sebFlyte: SyFy = Fail. That is all. (This one's my favourite.)

stitzelj: How long do you think it'll be before the SciFi Channel decides to do away with their new 'SyFy' brand due to the general outcry against it?

VoltjanStevens: SciFi Channel is changing their name to Syfy? That is TERRIBLE. That is SO. STUPIDLY. AWFUL.

jenn2d2: The day that the Sci-Fi Channel becomes "SyFy" is when I stop consuming their content. I guess they don't need geeks with disposable income.

What's my take? Seems to be another example of a corporation trying to own the rights to everything, even creating their own unlikable word to claim an entire genre as their own brand.

Dumb? Yes...but not surprising.

Want to Buy a Haunted House?

2009-03-19T11:32:00.007-04:00

According to ABC News, people generally don’t want to live in a house someone died in, especially if somewhere in the property's history are the words "mass murder."

Well, duh.

A “stigmatized” property - what those in the real eastate biz call homes with bad karma - can lose hundreds of thousands of dollars in value. The other problem with "stigmatized" homes is that the reason it's stigmatized is more easily hidden from buyers than a leaky roof or creaky floors.

"Murder would seem to be horrific and would garner a 50 percent reduction, whereas a landslide on the property might be more toward 30 percent."

Considering the condition the real estate market’s already in, this sounds like it might be a pretty serious problem; either too many haunted houses are on the market or too many agents are tricking people into buying them.

But what’s with the picture they put with it?

Scary!

Way to make fun of people who don't want to live in the Amityville Horror house. They must be crazy.

Leprechauns. They're Magically Ridiculous

2009-03-17T14:03:00.015-04:00

It’s 2 pm on St. Patrick’s Day, and you know what that means!

You’re probably not reading this because you’re out drinking somewhere.

But just in case you’re not, here’s a little poem to bring you some Irish cheer.

Near a misty stream in Ireland in the hollow of a tree
Live mystical, magical leprechauns
who are clever as can be
With their pointed ears, and turned up toes and little coats of green
The leprechauns busily make their shoes and try hard not to be seen.
Only those who really believe have seen these little elves
And if we are all believers
We can surely see for ourselves.
(Irish Blessing)

Also, if you like to laugh (and who doesn't?) check out this actual news report on a leprechaun sighting. (Hilarious!)

Normally I’m pretty open-minded, but this I just don’t buy.

I did enjoy that super-lifelike sketch though.

What is Facebook up to?

2009-03-16T21:43:00.010-04:00

They’ve got your name, location, phone number, email address, interests, beliefs, daily activities, pictures, conversations, dreams, and the names and related information of your family and friends. Basically, all the happenings of your life.

So who are they exactly? And what are they doing with all that valuable information?

Here's one answer:

I actually read through those painfully long and boring Facebook Terms of Use just to see if the video was was telling the truth, at least about the Terms of Use part. And what did I discover?

It was all there. (Then I realized that was the first time I ever actually read the Facebook Terms of Use.)

Another Term I found interesting was:

“We reserve the right, at our sole discretion, to change, modify, add, or delete portions of these Terms of Use at any time without further notice...It is your responsibility to regularly check the Site to determine if there have been changes to these Terms of Use and to review such changes.”

I don’t typically read any terms of use (Does anyone?), but this seems odd.

They could basically say,

“If the Company so hereto desires, the Company can irreversibly, conclusively, indisputably, irrefutably, sell all of your information to the fat cats of billion-dollar companies. The Company is not responsible for how this affects you, as you, the User, acknowledged, accepted, and understood, these unnecessarily complicated Terms of Use. And you can't do anything about it.”

Wait - isn't that what they're saying?

Gotta love that tricky language.

Big Surprise: Police Brutality Protest ends in Violence

2009-03-16T16:39:00.010-04:00

What’s wrong with this sentence?

“Seventeen people arrested during an anti-police brutality demonstration that turned into a riot are facing charges including mischief, theft, assault and possession of weapons...”

So, they were protesting police brutality by engaging in violence...that sounds about right.

According to the Toronto Star:

“Police were pelted with bricks, bottles and food during the annual protest, organized by the Collective Opposed to Police Brutality, a Montreal group.”

There was also vandalism done to police cars, other cars, and store windows, with a grand total of $200,000 in damages.

But unfortunately, the Toronto Star article doesn’t mention the event leading up to the protest.

About a week before, in the same park where the protest was held, 18-year-old Fredy Villanueva was killed and two other men were shot and wounded when police attempted to make an arrest.

A CBC article states:

“The park [where the first shooting occurred] is in a predominantly Haitian neighbourhood where tensions between police and young people run high, according to residents. ‘The police are always creeping around here, hassling people,’ one unidentified youth told CBC News as he stood in front of a looted butcher shop.”

I don’t know what’s more ironic: being arrested for assault while participating in an anti-police brutality protest, that police brutality seems to occur more in places where people are already suspicious of (and under suspicion by) police, or, that people who are supposed to uphold the law don't appear to be subject to it themselves.

Just recently, surveillance footage was released of two police officers using excessive force on a 15-year-old girl.

Deputy Paul Schene defended himself by claiming the girl kicked her shoes off at him, causing "bruising, bleeding, and pain" as well as a "blood filled pocket." You tell me if his reaction was understandable (although I seriously doubt you will).

Obviously, not all police officers like to use their power to beat people up for no reason, but how the hell can they be police officers if they do!?

And if they're the police, who will police the police?
(Question care of The Simpsons.)

Equilibrium

2009-03-15T22:13:00.008-04:00

What a wonderful surprise, on a Sunday night when nothing else is on, to find Equilibrium (2002) on TV. Hooray for the Space channel!

If you haven’t seen this movie yet, I seriously recommend it.

Based on Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World (1932), and starring Christian Bale – which should tell you right there that it’s good – Equilibrium is about a futuristic “ideal” society where it’s illegal for people to feel, or even own anything that could incite human emotion, such as art and music.

The whole idea is that human emotion is the cause of all war, so by eliminating emotion, they can end war forever...only hunting down and killing people who feel is just a new kind of war.

Kind of reminds me of that famous but very wrong phrase all the way from WWI. You know, how it was supposed to be “The war to end all wars”?

Maybe that was Huxley’s inspiration...

Realize, Resist, Revolt (website for MIT-ers)

2009-03-15T18:09:00.020-04:00

I Stumble(d)Upon this neat site for MIT-ers, or I guess anyone who questions what they’re told...and then analyzes the heck out of it.

Just click on an intriguing button, and there you have it: a summary of pretty much everything you already knew from being in this program.

And it has fun pictures!

Why, Infomercials? Why?!

2009-03-14T15:09:00.009-04:00

Do you ever see those infomercials that highlight herbal remedies that no one knows about but "totally work"? There’s always the same Letterman-style set-up with a fake night-time city in the background, and some person no one’s ever heard of being interviewed by someone else no one's never heard of. The whole thing = cheesiness (especially when it's on during the day).

Here are some of the more ridiculous quotes from an infomercial for Veggie Cal D. From what I could gather, it’s some sort of combination of seaweed, calcium, and vitamin D.

Said product:

“is a natural medical insurance”
“is a super-supplement”
“is an insurance policy to better health”
“can reduce risk of cancer by up to 50%”
"is made from God-given nutrients”

From the interview:

“They (pharmaceutical companies) don’t want you to know about it.”
“I’m just reporting on what the scientific community is reporting on.”

In small print:

“Results not typical”
“Not tested by the Food and Drug Administration”
“Not intended to prevent diagnose, treat, or cure any disease”

I’m sold!

Or, maybe I could just drink some milk, eat some cereal (with more milk), and chill out in the sun instead of inside with these ridonculous twisting-of-the-truth-o-mercials.

5 Funny Human-Made Crop...Circles?

2009-03-13T19:58:00.014-04:00

Also known as wheat graffiti, crop circles have so far defied explanation.

Since they first appeared in England 30ish years ago, hundreds of new formations pop up around the world every year...and they're getting bigger and more complex.

But some are definitely human-made.

I have to admit, they can sometimes be hard to decipher from the "real" ones (yes, I got fooled a few times), but not these crop circles -if that's what you call them. Nope. These ones are just funny.

5.

4.

3.

2.

1.

(This is not an advertisement.)

Images: NextNature.net

10 Cool Crop Circles

2009-03-12T18:13:00.016-04:00

Whether or not you believe they’re evidence of UFOs landing on Earth, geological phenomenon, or just the antics of some sneaky artists (that can somehow make concentric circles and perfect angles while on the ground without taking enough time for someone to notice, and who, for some reason, don't want any credit for making them), crop circles have to be one of the coolest things ever.

There are so many amazing images out there, so I chose 10 that just stood out to me.

Also, notice that in some there are dark specks in the middle of the circles. I think those specks are people...just to give an idea of how big these things are.

10. Looks like a sun.
(from NextNature.net)

9. Looks like a spider web.
(from NextNature.net)

8. Looks like a flower.
(from JECichon.com)

7. Looks like the Star of David in the middle.
(from WebUrbanist.com)

6. Looks like the number 8, and kind of like a snake.
(from GalacticFreedomDay.com

5. Looks like a spiral graph.
(from JesusWasNotHisName.com)

4. Almost looks like our solar system.
(from NextNature.net)

3. Just crazy. If you tilt your head to the right, that star-shaped thing looks like it has a face.
(from CropCircleConnector.com)

2. Looks like three heads with big eyes.
(from GreatDreams.com)

1. Looks ancient...like some sort of calendar.
(from LucyPringle.co.uk)

Write your own "Twilight"

2009-03-11T16:18:00.010-04:00

If you've ever thought about writing a supernatural novel, whether it's about vampires, demons, ghosts, werewolves, zombies, or aliens, now is the time to do it.

With the huge success of Stephanie Meyer's Twilight series, publishers and (especially teen) readers are getting sucked in to the genre.

Personally, I love vampire stories; for some reason they've always fascinated me. But my criticism of most (mainstream) vampire books and movies is that they're not scary; they're love stories, or at least strories about seduction.

Usually the vampires are sexy, mysterious, sometimes kind-hearted, and mostly men. (I'm thinking of Angel from the Buffy the Vampire Slayer series, Louis from Interview with the Vampire, Lestat from Queen of the Damned, and of course, the newest blood-sucking charmer from Twilight.)

As much as I didn't like 30 Days of Night, I think they had the scariest vampires yet, not only because of their black hollow eyes and pointy blood-stained teeth, but because of their unconventional anti-Prince Charming behaviour.

Do we really need another version of The Perfect Guy to compare to the not-so-perfect guys out there? (No offense to all the guys, but seriously, no one's that perfect.)

Give me something to be scared of!

Another Documentary: America's Most Hated Family

2009-03-10T23:25:00.013-04:00

WARNING: The following contains foul language and very bizarre thinking. May also cause outrage.

I really don't want to give these people any more exposure than they’ve already had, but since this blog is all about lunacy and things that I find just plain nuts, I can’t resist.

About 2 years ago the BBC did a really, um, interesting documentary on a religious cult that's become America's most hated family - at least that's the title of it.

They're known for protesting the funerals of AIDS victims, murdered Amish children, and soldiers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan to name a few, by holding signs and screaming, “Soldiers are fags,” “God hates fags/soldiers/Muslims/Jews,” and “Thank God for dead soldiers." And they're still at it today.

They also call themselves Christian. No, sorry, the only true Christians.

The mother, Shirley Phelps-Roper (crazy lady extraordinaire), even has the smallest of her 11 children saying those things and waving signs...and they don’t even know what they mean! Obviously Crazy Lady doesn’t even know what she’s talking about. (She’s crazy after all). There's definitely some serious brainwashing going on there.

Their entire belief system, or whatever you want to call it, is just another case of I’m right and you’re wrong, with absolutely no intelligent (or even slightly human)things being said – aside from Louis Theroux piping in with Reason and all the passersby flipping them off.

This is just part 1/8, but I promise there isn’t a dull moment.

(Image: NowPublic.com)

Watch This: Canadian in Afghanistan

2009-03-10T10:51:00.009-04:00

In my last post, “Make Jobs, Not War,” I mentioned that I know some people who have fought in Iraq. One of them is a guy I went to middle school with named Glen Villa. (And he was actually in Afghanistan. Sorry for the mix-up.)

While flipping through channels one day back in January, I saw Glen in a CBC documentary, "Fighting Ghosts,” which showed clips of his video journal from Afghanistan.

But what I remember most about that broadcast when it actually aired – I mean, besides the scary horrible realness of the footage – was that at the end, Peter Mansbridge said the military wasn’t exactly upset with Glen for sharing his experiences, but asked him not to speak to the news media anymore.

Pshh! If anything, this is what the news media should be showing. But since it’s “not allowed” or whatever (*cough bull@#$% cough*) there’s no reason I can’t post it here.

It’s really good and I want to encourage everyone to watch it!

Part 1

Part 2

Make Jobs, Not War

2009-03-09T17:36:00.008-04:00

I found this cartoon a while ago, and I just kept it bookmarked. But I think now would be a good time to use it.

Like the guy in the cartoon, I’m about to graduate. But it just so happens there’s a recession going on. And it just so happens I want a career that’s not in demand and already pays pretty crappy.

But my fear of graduating after spending $20,000 and countless hours studying and overcoming last-minute project panic attacks, oh, and not finding a job after all that, isn’t the entire point of this post. As the cartoon suggests, this has something to do with war.

I’m going to say something "daring" now. Ready?
Unemployment in the US is the highest it’s been in 25 years because of a certain $3 trillion war (for the most part).

$3 trillion?! I don’t even know what that means. That’s like 12 zeros with a 3 on the end.
Now here I go attempting to do math: $3 trillion + 1 big war – nearly 100,000 lives = 1 giant mistake.

When I showed my mom this cartoon, she thought it might be offensive to soldiers. That’s not what I’m saying here. I know people who have fought in Iraq, and people who still are, so I’m definitely not trying to insult them (or anyone else who’s risked or given their lives for that matter).

My own personal turmoil aside, and that of the thousands of unemployed Canadians (which still isn't that bad considering), wouldn’t it really suck to go to war in a foreign country, get shot at, see your friends get injured or killed, only to come home and not be able to find a job?

It’s almost like history keeps repeating itself…

How to be Green (spoof)

2009-03-08T23:05:00.006-04:00

If you don’t know the environment is in trouble, you must be living in a cave. If you’ve seen The Day After Tomorrow and weren’t scared out of your mind, you must not be human. For those who were, you know what will happen if we don’t change our ways.

Tidal waves will take out the most popular American cities; Canada will instantly be covered in snow; the only people who will survive will be rich, powerful, celebrities. Don't give them the satisfaction!

Follow these green tips and you can hold off environmental collapse, at least until the end of your lifetime.

1. Don’t Drive...Less

Even though most major highways now have carpool lanes, you can still be environmentally- friendly when driving alone. First of all, keep your speed above 100 km/hour – the faster you drive, the faster you’ll get where you want to go, and the less gas you’ll use.

Secondly, if you're planning to buy a car, a fuel-efficient one is a smart choice. It may be less expensive and less polluting to take a bus, but let’s face it, a hybrid is just more convenient (and you don’t have to worry about sitting on someone else’s gum).

Besides, cow farts are the primary cause of methane gas pollution anyway, and that’s hardly your fault. In fact, by 2040, the government plans to harness methane gas as an alternative fuel, or at least utilize it for wind power.

2. Don’t let it Mellow

You’ve probably heard the phrase, “If it’s yellow let it mellow, if it’s brown flush it down.” This is a fool’s motto. Letting things “mellow” means that extra-dirty toilet water is being flushed into our lakes and rivers, which are becoming increasingly crappier.

As a result of this scarcity of clean water, many cities have designated water use restrictions; however, if you don’t want to risk your beautiful rosebushes to dehydration, you can still be green by watering your plants with a watering can filled with tap water instead of a hose. Your neighbours won’t even know. Plus, roses are part of the environment too.

3. Don’t Donate

We all know that newspapers, pop cans, and water bottles are recyclable. But more and more people are starting to recycle their old clothes, furniture, books, and electronics by donating them with the belief that they're creating less waste.

In reality, when you donate your old possessions, you’re just wasting gas in order to get there. Also, people who buy what you decided was too good for you will likely wash them before use, thereby wasting water as well. The landfills aren’t getting any smaller, so what’s another pair of socks or entire living room set?

4. Don’t Flick Off

Sadly, there is no way to conserve electricity. We always have something on: the television, the computer, the lights, the razor, the washing machine, the dryer, the hair straightener, the refrigerator, the microwave, the coffee-maker, the vacuum, the cell phone charger, the blow dryer, the PlayStation, the air purifier, street lamps, some vehicles, McDonald’s golden arches, highway billboards, and office building lights, photocopiers, fax machines, and of course, the logo on the outside.

There's really no avoiding it, so just take advantage of electricity while you still can.

And remember: Don’t stop buying. Just buy green.

The Queen: Dinosaur or Dinosauroid?

2009-03-07T00:05:00.009-05:00

In my post, “Human Rights Can be Funny Too,” I mentioned conspiracy theorist David Icke.

For those who aren’t familiar with Icke’s work, he’s pretty much famous for spreading the idea that the world is being controlled by a secret society called the Illuminati, which he believes is comprised of reptilian-humanoids (a term that can also be substituted with Snakepeople, Reptoids, Lizardfolk, Lizard People, or the lamest of the bunch, Dinosauroids).

Icke claims that George W. Bush, Queen Elizabeth II, Hillary Clinton, and Tony Blair are just a few members of this scaly clan.

This sounds crazy, I know. Like something right out of The X-Files. (Actually, I’m pretty sure the overarching plot of the super amazing show that should have never ended was based on this theory.)

But I found this video on kindastrange.net, my new go-to for paranormal news, which actually makes the whole Icke-reptoid thing seem more convincing. It talks about the different cultures around the world that believe humans are descended from, and even created by, reptiles.

Strange thing is, the only places that don’t have these beliefs are places where the government and Church have dominated knowledge and understanding. (Oh, so that’s why it sounds so insane!)

As if the evidence against our leaders being human couldn’t be any more damning.

By the by, you can get your own Dinosauroid Queen paraphernalia at Teach the Controversy.

YouTube, ITube, WeAllTube: Response to An Anthropological Introduction to YouTube

2009-03-04T17:03:00.017-05:00

Whenever I tell people I’m in MIT (Media, Information, and Technoculture), they always ask, “What do you do? Watch movies in class?” And when I say, “yeah, sometimes,” they give me this disappoint head shake, as if that’s nothing. As if what we’re doing doesn’t matter, or is so easy and fun that it’s completely pointless.

This is not the case. At all.

As Marshall McLuhan said (and I think this quote might actually be the MIT catchphrase), “The medium is the message.” The reason we watch movies, TV shows, news broadcasts, and YouTube in class, is because everyone does it. Because media affects us and plays such a major part of everyday life, us MIT-ers are just trying to find out the why and how.

In the YouTube video, “An Anthropological Introduction to YouTube,” there was one line in particular that caught my attention: “When media change, human relationships change.” So why shouldn’t it be studied?

Without TV, the internet, and cell phones, we probably wouldn’t be alone as much. We might not even feel the need to be as self-expressive, to set ourselves aside form the anonymous mass. Being separated/fragmented individuals, it’s obvious we want a solid community. It just so happens that YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, and the blogosphere is it.

People were offended and hurt when lonelygirl15, for example, was revealed to be fake, resulting in a YouTube “authenticity crisis.” You wouldn’t want your friends or family to lie to you, so why is it any different when your online friends (people you trust and talk to and listen to) aren’t who you thought they were? It brings the loneliness back, and people don’t like that feeling. No one likes to be played like that.

Sometimes...no, every time I YouTube I find the rudest comments (and some I can’t even read because apparently spelling and grammar are a thing of the past). I almost want to tell them to shut the F up if they’re going to be so negative, but then it really wouldn’t be YouTube.

The anonymity of the “invisible audience” is what makes YouTube a place for and of authenticity; if everyone knew it was really YOU speaking, you might not say what you really think. You might not even bother to say anything.

Newspapers, the telephone, the radio, the television, and the Internet have all changed the way we work, interact, think, and basically live. But there’s one scenario that can change everything, and I mean, everything: a power outage.

Imagine you couldn’t watch TV, check your email, drive, buy groceries, check your email again, text your BFF, cook. Our world as we know it would fall in on itself; without our technology and our media, we’d be completely lost and probably very lonely.

Then again, it might mean we’d start connecting more physically, say, having a conversation with someone while in the same room. Not that we don’t do that now, but now we have a choice not to.

See? There's more to MIT than just “watching movies.”

Now watch this movie.

There's No Such Thing as a UFO

2009-03-04T00:03:00.010-05:00

Naturally an article called, “UFOs Do Not Exist” caught my attention, especially when it’s in UFO Digest. But being a big believer in extra-terrestrial intelligence myself, it seems UFO’s really don’t exist. Of course! I don’t know why I didn’t realize it before.

What thousands of people report as UFOs are actually “IFOs” (Identified Flying Objects) or “IPFOs” (Intelligently Piloted Flying Objects). If they aren’t part of some sort of military project, or the creation of pranksters with lots of money and serious engineering capabilities, then we should know exactly what they are, right? What we should be doing is questioning what’s inside.

So I guess when skeptics disregard the claims of “IFO” witnesses, what they’re really unsure of is the existence of UIPIFOs (Unidentified Intelligent Pilots of Identified Flying Objects).

That was a mouthful. Maybe I’ll just stick to using “UFO.” Plus, I think I’d get more strange looks if I said, “I saw a UIPIFO,” should it ever happen.

But according to an uncovered secret Ministry of Defense report, it never will...unless I plan to visit plasma fields anytime in the future.

"Local fields of this type have been medically proven to cause responses in the temporal lobes of the human brain. These result in the observer sustaining his or her own vivid, but mainly incorrect, description of what is experienced.”

One question: why would people hallucinate UFOs?

(Image: Daily Mail. Also check out this crazy-awesome UFO image from The Sun)

Design your Own Baby?

2009-03-03T12:51:00.009-05:00

Thanks to The Fertility Institute, children of the future will actually be able to blame their parents for everything that’s wrong with them. Can you imagine? “Mom, I have a zit! Why didn’t you design me so I wouldn't have acne?”

That’s right... DESIGN. The Fertility Institute in New Orleans uses science called Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD), which not only allows doctors to eliminate certain diseases like Down Syndrome and muscular dystrophy, but gives parents the option to choose their baby’s sex, eye colour, hair colour, and even skin colour. Creepy!

What’s next? Putting calculators and CD Roms in their brains? How about wings? No, no! The ability to live forever! Muahahaha!

Actually, come to think of it, if you could be born without any defects (well, at least that’s the hope), that would probably mean living a lot longer.

But design your own baby? That sounds like some kind of sick Frankenstein creation, and we all know how well that turned out. Not that I wouldn’t want to be able to fly or anything; the whole thing is just really weird. And isn’t it a slap in the face to all of us who were born like normal people, with flaws and quirks and all that? What, we’re not good enough?

And, now that I think of it (while watching a make-over show no less), with the standard “ideals” our society holds, wouldn’t everyone be born – or, emerge from a glass jar – looking and acting the same?

Yep, that’s one giant leap for semi-humankind.

(Image: Sebastian Niedlich (Grabthar) How perfect is that?)

Questions for Pro-Lifers

2009-03-02T23:24:00.005-05:00

The other day when I went grocery shopping I spotted some pro-life protesters across the street waving “Stop abortion” and “This hospital kills babies in the womb” signs.(Image: NewsPick.) I had one immediate response when I saw this: What exactly do they mean by “Stop Abortion”?

But the questions didn’t stop there.

Does stopping abortions mean all abortions, no matter the reason or circumstance?
Does this also include rape victims?
What about 13-year-olds who, at 13, simply aren’t ready to become parents?
Are the people protesting for abortion bans the same people who oppose safe-sex education in schools? (Because if so, that would be messed up.)
Isn’t the world already over-populated?
What about the recession? What if the would-be parents can't afford a child?
Aren’t couples who have abortions heartsick by their decision? Why should it be made any harder for them?
What if the mother has health problems and the pregnancy threatens her life?
What about violent pro-life protesters? Doesn’t violence negate the pro-life cause?
Would banning abortions cause private “clinics” to be set up?
Why not let people make their own decisions?
Would denying people that option deny them certain freedoms?
Why aren’t people more sexually responsible?
Would banning abortion result in less unwanted pregnancies?
Will this debate ever end?

So many questions. Please share your thoughts.

Check out The Center for Bio-Ethical Reform and Stats Canada for abortion statistics.

Get Down with Rise Against

2009-02-27T21:01:00.005-05:00

Lyrically-awesome, politically-charged, makes-you-want-to-get-up-and-jump-around Rise Against deserves a tip o the hat, even if it's just from me. Why, you may be wondering? They’ve recently been given PETA’s Best Animal Friendly Band Award!

But I guess it’s not that surprising, seeing as how the members of RA are strict vegetarians and proud PETA-supporters. C’mon, it would be like leather-bound Marilyn Manson not winning the Most Frequent Cow-Wearer Award. (Image: RiseAgainst.com – Isn’t it kind of strange that it looks like it says, “Rise Against Vegetarians”?)

Wait – there’s more…

Besides their in-your-face music, RA’s videos are chock-full of truth. Their PETA-inspired video for “Ready to Fall” condemns animal cruelty by taking aim at sport-hunting (pun intended), environmental pillaging and pollution, “efficient” mass-processing technologies, and our general ignorance of the issue.

And just as PETA uses shocking, disturbing, nightmare-inducing images to create awareness, “Ready to Fall” will make you think twice about where your food comes from – and then make you want to kick your own ass for not thinking about it before.

True to their name, Rise Against goes against the mainstream by using music to expose violence rather than exploit it (50 Cent comes to mind here) and by using their fame to encourage change.

Aside from their PETA-friendliness, RA has teamed up with Vans to create a line of skate shoes that are not only vegan-appropriate, but slave-labour-free. (Yeah, apparently such things DO exist.) However, their video for “Prayer of the Refugee” shows this particular fight is far from over.

Set in what looks like a Wal-Mart, “Prayer of the Refugee” slams slave labour by exploring the histories of the products sitting on the shelves, and the lives of the workers who make them. Suddenly rollback prices don’t look so good.

And with their latest album, Appeal to Reason, RA has already begun to tackle the “hot” topics of today. Illegal immigration, the war in Iraq, gay marriage, Gitmo, and the silencing of truth by those in power are fair game in RA’s new video, “Audience of One.”

Like “Ready to Fall” and “Prayer of the Refugee,” “Audience of One” is a reflection of our world, and of what needs to be fixed. An appeal to reason, perhaps?

The video shows a little boy playing with a model world, and by playing I mean destroying. I'm pretty sure the boy is supposed to be George W. Bush.

Did I mention I love these guys?

P.S. Rise Against Canada and US tour dates have been announced. I guess I know where I’ll be July 31, 2009!

Human Rights Can be Funny Too

2009-02-26T22:14:00.009-05:00

Since I seem to be on some sort of free-speech kick, let’s just keep it going with a spoof article I came across called, “Human rights lawyer sues himself.” At first I didn’t understand why it was supposed to be funny, other than the idea of a human rights lawyer suing himself.

But the lawyer in the story is named Richard Warman. That’s not quite funny enough do be made up, so who exactly is Richard Warman? (And am I the only person who's never heard of him until now?)

Apparently he's a Canadian human rights lawyer who has made more complaints to the Canadian Human Rights Commission than, well, anyone else. Not that that’s necessarily a bad thing; it’s not like there aren’t human rights violations happening right now that need to be complained about.

But among his complaints about white supremacists on the internet, he’s also focused a lot of his energy on suing conspiracy theorist David Icke (more on him to come), and requested that British Columbia libraries remove all copies of Icke’s book, “Children of the Matrix,” from their shelves. Warman isn’t exactly known for leaving (mainly conservative) bloggers alone either.

Oddly enough, all this information can be found at RichardWarman.com. Even weirder is the fact that it’s not even his site. There’s a disclaimer at the bottom that says, “This site is to document the actions of Richard Warman. Richard Warman has no association with this site.”

Now that is hilarious.

(Chart: RichardWarman.com)

Free Speech/Hate Speech

2009-02-19T15:52:00.008-05:00

After reading Paul Sham’s post on the internet’s role in shaping democracy, and after writing/ranting about Holocaust deniers and woman-haters, I’m now left wondering about “freedom of speech.”

For one, is there a difference between “free speech” and “hate speech”? In his post Paul questions the ability of the web to democratize since it usually turns into an I’m-right-and-you’re-wrong competition, complete with insults and threats.

At this point, I would have to say that the right to “Freedom of Speech” is an illusion. Sure, we can all say what we want to say; it’s not like we’re all walking around with duct tape over our mouths…well, not literally. But if we say things that will offend or hurt another person/group of people, we’re suddenly not free anymore, and the metaphorical duct tape is firmly put in place.

The internet is making this freedom more real, yes, but the speaker is always susceptible to responses/threats/name-calling from their angry critics.

Take, for example, Bishop Richard Williamson, who claims that Jews made up the Holocaust. Obviously his comments upset a lot of people, but could we really believe we’re living in a democracy is he couldn’t express himself?

And in the same respect, should the people who think he’s an anti-Semite who needs to do some research not be allowed to say he’s an anti-Semite who needs to do some research?

It’s a very sticky issue, and no matter what is said it seems someone will always be hurt, offended, or disgusted by it. For example, I am pro-choice. Oops, I just pissed off a bunch of people!

I'm not trying to be rude, but here’s why I don’t care:

"Maintenance of a system of free expression is necessary:

as assuring individual self-fulfillment
as a means of attaining the truth
as a method of securing participation by the members of the society in social, including political, decision-making
as maintaining the balance between stability and change in society”
(from U of Ottawa)

Without disparate voices speaking out, women might not be “legal persons,” a black man might not be the President of the United States, this freedom to speak out might not even exist. Then where would we be?

Women Everywhere! Beware Dick Masterson

2009-02-18T20:54:00.009-05:00

I just came across this website called MenAreBetterThanWomen.com. I don’t really know if it’s a joke, but I’m pretty sure there are actually men that stupid out there. So naturally, I must rant about it.

I’ll try to keep this short, but I doubt it will be sweet. And just so I don’t go rambling on in a fit of rage and annoyance, I’ll just refer to one of the articles, entitled, “Female Oppression: More Monkey Shit.”

In this article/piece of crap that makes absolutely no sense, it’s argued that MEN are the ones who have been oppressed for centuries (but keep in mind, the few brave men he's talking about were punished by other men):

“The fact is, men have been the real victims of oppression throughout history, not women. Men have been oppressed for their brilliance in math. Men have been punished for their innovations in science. Men have been drowned, stabbed, burned, tortured, and killed just for picking up a piece of chalk instead of a frying pan and a birth control test.”

Are you insane? It was never a law that (white) men couldn’t vote; it was never a law that a wife could beat, rape, or kill her husband. Look, I could go on for days about why this guy is a complete moron, and a...what's that word again? Oh yeah, hypocrite, but I won’t! At least not right now.

I would just like to bring to attention a story about a Saudi woman who is going to jail for being gang-raped.

After she accepted a ride from a man, the 23-year-old woman was taken to a house and gang-raped by the kidnapper and four of his friends. When she found out she was pregnant and attempted to get an abortion, she was taken to court and given a one-year prison sentence. After the child is born (that’s right, no abortion AND jail-time) she will receive 100 lashes.

The crime? Adultery - even though she’s not married.

Is that not female oppression? Or is it just evil?

...Dick! (Actually his name. Go figure.)

Holy Crap! (Bishop denies Holocaust)

2009-02-17T13:01:00.010-05:00

Apparently a bishop – you know, someone who, by definition and requirement, believes in God – denies the Holocaust and ignores the murder of 11,000,000 people because there’s “no proof” that it occurred.

Um, is that what you call hypocrisy, or just plain nuts?

A letter written to the Belfast Telegraph caught my attention because it asked those questions (but not in those words, exactly), and it got me searching for more.

I found another article, this one from BBC News, which reported that Bishop Richard Williamson claims the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion” is authentic. This anti-Semitic piece of garbage supposedly reveals a secret plot for Jewish world domination, and has been proven a hoax numerous times since the early 20th century – hence the garbage comment.

To attempt to be fair, I should refer to this video in which Williamson explains that people were never killed in gas chambers. He doesn’t specifically deny that Jews were killed in Nazi concentration camps, but he says it was more likely 200,000 to 300,000.

Even more ridiculous is Williamson’s attempt to exonerate himself from his clearly anti-Semitic beliefs: "My definition of anti-Semitism is to be against every single Jew purely because he's a Jew. That's not at all my case. I once had a Jewish rabbi come and speak to seminarians. Does that sound to you like anti-Semitism?"

Well, no, but the part about the Holocaust never happening, and supporting the authenticity of a piece of hate literature that’s been used to justify the oppression and genocide of Jews, is.

Plus, it kind of reminds me of that part in movies when a white person is accused of being racist and all they can come up with is, “My grandma’s black. How can I be racist?”

But doing one semi-tolerant thing doesn’t make up for saying, "Jews made up the Holocaust, Protestants get their orders from the devil and the Vatican has sold its soul to liberalism,” or, “A woman can do a good imitation of handling ideas, but then she will not be thinking properly as a woman.”

So if denying the Holocaust isn’t anti-Semitic, does that mean calling Protestants devil-worshipers isn’t hateful? Or that claiming women are inherently stupid isn’t sexist?

Is this guy Rush Limbaugh’s best friend or something?

For the sake of being rhetorical, even IF (IF) the Holocaust didn't happen the way we're told it happened, according to Williamson at least 200,000 people were imprisoned and killed in Nazi concentration camps. Whether gas chambers were used or not, it doesn't make what happened any less awful.

business day v. Family Day

2009-02-16T19:37:00.010-05:00

Today is Family Day, and some people are complaining (and no, it’s not just those clocking in hours). According to CTV, small business-owners aren’t happy with the new stat holiday because they stand to lose $2 billion just for keeping their doors closed.

I have two family members who fall into this “small-business owner” category; my stepmom owns a pet/wild bird food store, Creature Comfort Co., which is across the street from my aunt’s bulk/health food store, Foodstuffs, in downtown Georgetown.

Now don't get me wrong, I always enjoy a day off, but since these stores are located downtown, they have to close on Sundays too. If small businesses are losing money because they have to close one Monday in February, it seems like nothing in comparison to four or five Sundays every month. But they’re still doing well.

Since they're small, local, independent businesses, their customers are very loyal and would probably just go shopping there tomorrow if they needed something. And since my stepmom and aunt only have a few employees – well, compared to the amount of employees at say, one Tim Hortons – they usually work every day that they’re open. If you ask me, they deserve a break.

I just wonder how long it’ll take Hallmark to start making cards...

A Saint called Valentine

2009-02-14T21:48:00.008-05:00

Is there any holiday that isn’t been bogged down with buying things? Seriously, I couldn’t even go to the corner store to buy a loaf of bread without running into little teddy bears holding hearts that say, “I Wuv U." So it’s not that surprising that I couldn’t find any information on Valentine’s Day without seeing pink and red ads galore - and without resorting to Wikipedia.

But enough with the bitterness; it’s love day!

According to legend, February 14 is the day the patron saint of love was executed. Arrested around 270 CE by Roman Emperor Claudius II for conducting secret marriages, Valentine has since become a symbol of love and romance.

After his death he became the overseer of an annual festival in which Roman men gave women they liked a hand-written letter confessing their desires. How romantic.

But like most marketable traditions, some historians suggest St. Valentine may better represent Christian love (even though the "Saint" part is usually left out of the cards).

It’s said that Claudius attempted to convert Valentine from his Christian faith to worship the Roman gods; Valentine refused, and even tried to convert the Emperor.

Either way, whichever legend is true, it appears love is still at the heart of it. And I suppose chocolate doesn't hurt either.

What's the Deal with Friday the 13th?

2009-02-13T22:23:00.008-05:00

Today is Friday the 13th, and I’m feeling a little curious.

Why is Friday the 13th “unlucky”? And walking under a ladder? And breaking a mirror? And spilling salt?

Why do I think all these superstitions are silly, and yet I definitely wouldn’t want to get on a plane today?

Turns out the belief in the unluckiness of Friday the 13th, and 13 in general, isn’t just some behavioral quirk or hard-to-read phobia name (Triskaidekaphobia).

No, the fear of the number 13 is so powerful and so common that it affects airport terminals, airplane seating, street signs, house numbers, and elevator buttons.

(As my fellow North Americans might have noticed, the 13th floor is cleverly renamed “14,” or as in my friend’s building, just “3.”)

So, where did this superstition even come from?

The most common answer I found dates back to the Last Supper, when the twelve apostles and Jesus gathered for supper, well, for the last time. Since Judas was the 13th guest to arrive, there's one legend that says if 13 people have dinner together, one of them will die within a year.

And, as I learned from National Treasure, Friday the 13th 1306 was the day King Philip of France arrested the Knights Templar and tortured them for false confessions of heresy.

Also, 12 is a complete number (months in a year, dials on a clock, signs of the zodiac), which makes 13 quite odd.

I don’t know if I completely buy this whole Friday the 13th stuff. Today’s been pretty good so far...knock on wood.

Speaking of knocking on wood, here are some informative pieces on other things people believe for no real reason.

Debunking Myths of Bad Luck

Origins of Superstition

Superstition and Survival

Top 10 Creepiest Movies about The Unexplained (pt.1)

2009-02-11T22:55:00.004-05:00

Some of these are strange, some are creepy, and some are downright freaky. Of course, I haven’t seen every movie out there, but from what I have, I’d say this is a pretty good countdown of boundary-pushing, possibility-exploring, fear-evoking movies on the ghostly, demonic, supernatural, and extra-terrestrial. Phew! Maybe you’ll agree; maybe not. Maybe you’ll think I’m a big scaredy-cat. No, wait…I am.

Enjoy!

10) Donnie Darko (2001)
After a jet engine crashes through his roof, a disturbed teenager (Donnie Darko) comes under the influence of a giant bunny rabbit named Frank, who tells him the world will end in 28 days. Frank convinces him to perform a series of crimes, while all along Donnie is becoming more and more captivated by the notion of time travel. This isn’t your typical scary movie, but for some reason it always gives me the chills. Maybe because it’s so dark; and that rabbit doesn’t help much either.

9) Frailty (2001)
Fenton Meiks enters an FBI agent’s office late at night to confess his knowledge of the “God’s Hand” killer. His knowledge is centred on two young brothers – one of who is telling the story – whose father claims to have been given a list of “demons” (real people) to vanquish (kill) in the name of God. There’s always the question of whether God is actually speaking to his father, or if he’s just crazy. It’s the not-knowing that keeps you watching until the superb (and freaky) twist at the end.

8) The Mist (2007)
A group of citizens are stranded in a supermarket when an eerie mist rolls into town. Hiding in the fog are giant carnivorous insect-like creatures that may or may not be supernatural. While the creatures themselves put on a good show, the scariest aspect of the movie is how people react to life-threatening situations, and how quickly they can turn against each other.

7) Village of the Damned (1995)
In a small town, ten women mysteriously become pregnant and give birth at the exact same time. Weird, right? Creepier is that when the children grow older, they all have white hair and glowing eyes, can read people’s thoughts, and make them do things against their will. Need I say more? (Even looking at that movie cover terrifies me.)

6) Stir of Echoes (1999)
When Tom Whitzky is hypnotized at a party he begins to see the ghost of a young girl in his house, leading him to embark on a search for the horrifying truth of what happened to her. What makes this movie creepy is the originality and believability of Tom’s supernatural experiences, and the bizarre change of character he undergoes to find some answers. The ghost is pretty freaky-looking too.

Top 10 Creepiest Movies about The Unexplained (pt.2)

2009-02-10T15:13:00.003-05:00

5) The Shining (1980)
What could be scarier than being stranded at a haunted hotel when your own family is trying to kill you? Or running into twin little-girl-ghosts (the worst kind of ghosts) while you’re innocently roaming the halls on your tricycle? Or seeing a tidal wave of blood hurling towards you? Aside from these hair-raising scenarios, this movie has so many memorable lines that it couldn’t not be in this list. “All scare and no help makes The Shining a creepy movie.” I tried.

4) The Sixth Sense (1999)
This Oscar-winner is about a kid who can see and communicate with dead people, and a child psychologist who devotes all his energy to help the poor boy. There were quite a few scenes that made me jump the first time I saw this, and the entire movie just made me feel all tense. But rather than being just an average ghost movie that uses predictable scare tactics, The Sixth Sense was nominated for six Academy Awards (coincidence?), made nearly $673 million worldwide, and had one of the best twist endings ever.

3) The Ring (2002)
Remember VHS? Remember how annoying it was to have to rewind your rentals before returning them to the store? Well, a video tape that kills you a week after you watch it is even worse. After a journalist and her creepy son watch the tape, they have one week to discover how it was made and why it’s killing people in order to stop their own demise. I think The Ring is one of those movies that sticks with you; I still get freaked out if the TV goes fuzzy.

2) Event Horizon (1997)
In 2047 a rescue team is sent to investigate the reappearance of a spaceship that has been missing for seven years. One the ship they discover a supernatural evil that uses their own fears and torments against them. This movie is certainly NOT for the squeamish or the easily-scared; it will traumatize you.

1) The Exorcist (1973)
When 12-year-old Regan begins conversing with “Captain Howdy” via Ouija board, a demonic spirit takes over her body. Unlike most movies that were made before special effects could barely be called mediocre effects, The Exorcist is still super-freaky. Who could forget the part when the possessed 12-year-old crawls backwards down the stairs, or the entire exorcism scene? And I thought pea soup couldn’t get any more disgusting.

Groundhog, Shmoundhog

2009-02-09T15:14:00.010-05:00

Why do we trust the groundhog? Who decided the six-week-shadow-rule? Does anyone actually check its accuracy at predicting winter’s end?

The Inner Circle of the Punxsutawney Groundhog Club claims Phil, the groundhog that’s supposedly been predicting the weather for over 100 years, is accurate 100% of the time. This year, according to the life-giving-elixir-drinking Phil, we’re in for six more weeks of winter.

But...the snow is melting...the days are longer...the spring seems near. *knock on wood* Has anyone considered that Phil runs back into his hole because there are so many people watching him, making tons of noise, and forcing him to take pictures when he just woke up and isn’t necessarily looking his best? Maybe the little guy just gets scared. Six more weeks of winter? Ha! I’ll leave that up to global warming.

Just one final question: Why do we trust the word, so to speak, of a furry little rodent who has supposedly been given the secret to ever-lasting life? If a person claimed to possess such powers, you’d think they were crazy! (Then again, if someone had a magic potion like that, they would probably keep it a lucrative money-making secret, Death Becomes Her-style.)

Maybe Phil is the Santa Claus for grown-ups – only they never seem to grow out of it.

Ranting about Rush

2009-02-08T17:35:00.011-05:00

Until recently I didn’t know who Rush Limbaugh was, but the name always sounded familiar. After doing some research (Googling), I wish the truth stayed a mystery.

Here are a few genius quotes/reasons why:

"Feminism was established to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream."

"He is exaggerating the effects of the disease. He's moving all around and shaking and it's purely an act." (on Michael J. Fox)

"You ever heard of the need to blow some steam off?" (on Abu Ghraib)

"The only way to reduce the number of nuclear weapons is to use them."

"The NFL all too often looks like a game between the Bloods and the Crips without any weapons. There, I said it."

"There are more acres of forestland in America today than when Columbus discovered the continent in 1492."

But he can’t be a complete moron right? After all, he’s the highest paid syndicated radio host ($33 million in 2007) and "the number one voice of conservativatism".

Wait – does that mean ALL conservatives defend torture, promote sexism, encourage homophobia, uphold racism, abuse drugs, mock other people’s illnesses, and possess the inability to fact-check? I just can't believe that, but with the powerful influence Limbaugh has, I really hope no one starts to.

Not surprisingly, and in addition to Limbaugh’s “magic negro” and “I hope he fails” comments, Barack Obama has urged Republicans to stop listening to Limbaugh’s show because he believes it will only separate the two parties – and Americans – further.

Of course, this caused Limbaugh to retaliate: “Now this is the great unifier. This is the man who’s going to unify everybody and usher in a new era of bi-partisanship and love.”

Granted, Obama may be considered a hypocrite for promoting unity while asking people to separate themselves from this brand of thinking, but how can a country be unified (change) when there’s hate for all those non-male, non-white, and non-American spewing out through the airwaves?

If there’s one more reason not to admire Limbaugh (there are several, but I’m just naming one), it’s his “clever” attempts at rewriting the dictionary. For example: “Bigot: someone who wins an argument with a liberal.”

Being a fan of the old-fashioned dictionary myself, I feel I should point out that if Limbaugh labels himself as a "bigot," his picture would also appear beside the word "maniac."

And bigots don’t win arguments. They start them.

(Chart: Pew Research Center)

Ad-Less, Get More

2009-02-05T21:44:00.018-05:00

Do you ever tire of opening the newest issue of your favourite magazine only to have to flip through 30 pages of ads just to get to the index?

Do you ever start reading a captivating article, turn the page and – UGH – it’s gone, replaced by some perfectly perfected supermodel you hope is simply the result of extensive airbrushing?

I know I do.

In my feeble quest to find alternative ad-free magazines, I made a rather shocking discovery: there are a lot of them. (So, on second thought, I guess it wasn’t really that feeble of an attempt.)

The slightly higher cost aside, there's an ad-less magazine for almost every audience out there, audiences that are currently being targeted and captured by the mainstream – and even ones that aren’t.

There are magazines for Christians, and divers, and poetry writers...And butchers, and bakers, and candlestick-makers. Okay, that last one was a joke (as far as I know); it just seemed to fit so well.

If you want to break free from the pressure to BUY! BUY! BUY! here are some alternatives:

- for Christians – Geez

- for Scuba Divers – In-Depth

- for Feminists – Bitch

- for Gardeners – Garden Gate

- for Science-Fans – Greater Good

- for Literary-Lovers – The Sun

- for Design and Photography Buffs – U&I

- for Political Junkies/ Environmentalists/ Culture Critics – Briarpatch; Adbusters; could also include Bitch

- for those who Like to Laugh – The Funny Times

- for a Little Bit of Everything – YES!

…and one last thing for Bloggers – Ad-Free Blog

If none of these sound like you, check out NewPages.com.

The Paraplex: Making the Paranormal Normal

2009-02-04T15:21:00.008-05:00

As if there already aren’t enough reasons to visit New Orleans – free beads! – it now holds the world’s first interactive paranormal epicenter.

The Paraplex, a former funeral home located on the famous Canal Street, is fully-loaded with 4 ghosts and 40 thermal and infrared cameras, which parapsychologist Dr. Larry Montz will use to “prove these things exist.”

In the mean time, visitors can participate in “fear experiments,” private séances, and psychometry tests to see if and how psychic they are. (If they are psychic shouldn’t they already know?)

The Paraplex is also part museum, featuring the Freddy Kruger glove, the Honey Island Swamp Monster footprint, a vampire hunting kit, and dolls from vampire-writer Anne Rice’s collection. How appropriate.

But if all the lab is using to catch ghosts is cameras, how would this “proof” be better than that already found on Ghost Hunters or Paranormal State (assuming, of course, that those investigators aren’t just actors with a sweet team of Photoshop pros)?

I wonder if “scientifically” proving every haunting and ghost story as true – knowing the unknown – would make the whole idea of paranormality more scary, less intriguing, or make any difference at all.

On the other hand, say if Montz and his team actually catch these ghosts on camera, maybe the “paranormal” would no longer exist.

If the existence of ghosts, UFOs, and psychic abilities is proven, thus becoming scientific fact, wouldn't that render the paranormal...well, normal?

Blogging, and Linking, and Tags, Oh My!

2009-02-03T14:23:00.011-05:00

Have you ever heard the expression, “you can’t teach an old dog new tricks”?

Yeah, I guess that saying has a ring of truth to it, and as most of those wise old sayings go, they can be applied to just about everything. For example, just replace “old dog” with “journalism,” and “can’t” with “can,” and what do you get? BLOGS!

I’ve been aware of these things called “blogs” for a while, read them occasionally, and wrote for them never. Now my first one is just one among millions – 70 million according to The State of the Live Web – so it’s hard to imagine that anyone would find mine in the vast sea of civic journalism and actually read it. Then again, Perez Hilton did pretty well for himself, as did Arianna Huffington.

But with a massive jump of 40 million new blogs in less than a year, I have to wonder why so many people are hopping on the blog-wagon. Being one of those people, here are some of my own reasons:

Need for personal expression
Desire to know, understand, and connect with others
Distrust of the mainstream media
Love of writing
Had to find out what all the fuss is about

Another motive for the blog craze could be out of a need to understand and deal with real-life issues. Techorati suggests this through its graph of Daily Posting Volume, which shows spikes in the amount of postings during such events as the 2004 US election, Hurricane Katrina, the Israel/Hezbollah conflict, and the time now-V.P. Biden called Obama “clean.” (Isn’t it strange that most of those are US-based?)

But if you think about it, the growing popularity of blogs can also help explain the increase in tagging and the trend towards folksonomy.

Folk (common people) and taxonomy (categorization system) collide in this modern and fun-to-say word. And just as categorizing everything and everyone – from gender, to religion, to political leanings, to food groups, to movie genres – helps us organize and better understand our world, so do blogs. Blogging and tagging allow us to search, link, share, debate, connect, and learn.

Their popularity has also given the mainstream news media some unexpected competition, even making it feel threatened enough that they had to incorporate our medium into theirs.

If you ask me – although, I guess if you’re reading this you want to know what I think – this brand of news, ie., blogging, is the most reliable news we have (for the moment anyway).

Bloggers don’t hide under journalism’s guise of “objectivity;” they tell it like it is and as it ought to be. But right or wrong, left or right, bloggers’/our ideas are flowing, leaving marks on a world we live, learn, and write about.

New tricks indeed!

One last relevant, timeless (yet slightly updated) saying:

“The blog is mightier than the Military-Industrial-Media Complex.”

2012 – The Feel-Good Movie of the Year!

2009-02-01T18:52:00.004-05:00

Isn’t it so typical of Hollywood to take real-life disasters, saturate them with fancy special effects, and make hundreds of millions off our love of a cheap thrill at the movies?

Guess what? They’re doing it again! But unlike Apollo 13, Titanic, World Trade Center, and Hotel Rwanda, the disasters in Roland Emmerich’s 2012 haven’t even happened…yet.

The hype-filled movie, which is scheduled to be released later this year, is based on none other than the Mayan prophecy of 2012. According to the ancient Mayan calendar, December 21, 2012 is the EXACT day the world is going to end!

Actually, some believe the date will bring with it a new age of enlightenment.

Some claim extra-terrestrials will come.

Others – and by others, I mean scientists and astronomers – predict 12/21/2012 is also the first time the sun will align with the Milky Way in 26,000 years.

If you're not a scientist, you might be wondering, "What the hell does that mean?" Well, I'll tell you (but I can't be held responsible for any panic that might ensue).

This once in a lifetime event (oh boy, lucky us!) may cause the Earth to undergo a polar shift and begin spinning in the opposite direction. This in turn would result in countless natural disasters all around the world, which you’re sure to witness in 2012.

While the movie, the trailer, and the release date are being kept very hush-hush for now, I imagine 2012 will be a mix of The Day After Tomorrow, Deep Impact, Daylight, Dante’s Peak, Twister, and maybe even War of the Worlds with a hint of Independence Day – if they decide to throw aliens in there too.

All this and John Cusack? I can’t wait! I just hope that when December 21 rolls around three years from now, we’ll still be able to say Emmerich's 2012 was "only a movie.”

"Buy American" rule has Canadians Hatin' on Obama

2009-01-30T21:03:00.013-05:00

Reading the hundreds of comments about the "Buy American” rule on CBC.ca, it seems many Canadians are placing all blame on Barack Obama - and on those whose political values lean more to the left.

A few commentators even felt the need to say things along the lines of: Haha! I told you! Barack Obama is just like Bush! All you lefties got fooled!

I have 3 responses to those comments:

1) It’s been less than two weeks since the man was elected; Bush had eight years.

2) There’s no need to label all lefties as suckers for believing in and wanting change after the last eight years. Can you really blame them?

3) Even if the US protectionism bill goes through, it’s less likely Canada will be significantly affected since

we share a pretty big border with the US
we supply most of their petroleum oil and natural gas – among other things
as Industry Minister Tony Clement stated, the US would be in violation of its treaty obligations
people and businesses in the US would be in more trouble than they already are

I can’t lie though. It is worrying that such a bill might get passed, and that the Canadian government might have to bully our way out of that jam with a "Buy Canadian" bill. Not that buying Canadian is a bad idea; it just seems like it would only be done out of spite.

The upside to this fiasco is that Obama hasn’t signed anything yet. But until and if he does, he’ll be hearing a lot of complaints from more than just his right-wing critics.

Danger: Buy This or Else!

2009-01-29T13:37:00.012-05:00

Geez, advertisements must have low self-esteem. Yeah, ads aren’t people, but think about it: They pump themselves up by making us – the viewers/readers/listeners/consumers – feel bad about ourselves, constantly reiterating the plain and simple truth that we suck.

We’re ugly, fat, our homes aren’t clean enough, we aren’t eating enough McDonald’s, we’re not spending enough time with our family, our boobs aren’t big enough, we don’t have the newest…whatever.

Low self-esteem is the advertising business. How else are we going to buy things we don’t need unless that “need” is created?

OMG! Not blackheads! No, I can’t live another second with that regular face wash! I need the fancy one made with Sodium Methyl Cocoyl Taurate, Titanium Dioxide, Trideceth-9, PEG-5 Ethylhexanoate, Xanthan Gum, and a whole lot of other ingredients I’ve never heard of and can’t pronounce. You know, the one Jennifer Love Hewitt uses so I can be hot like her!

Speaking of hot people and skin cleanliness, I recently saw a commercial for a product called Acne Pro (which is pretty much the same as Pro-Active but for half the price and sans celebrity endorsements).

It opened up with two 20-ish women looking at a picture of a young guy with acne. They basically just call him “gross,” and say they would never date someone who looked like that.

An equally mean commercial for Axe hair care products demonstrates similar bullying tactics. In the commercial, a bunch of modelesque guys put on semi-ridiculous wigs and try to pick up girls, all of whom refuse.

The commercial ends with: “If guys like this can’t get girls because of their hair, what chance do you have?” Watch it if you haven’t seen it yet.

The sad thing is, even if these were the meanest commercials out there, commercials that are obviously just trying to make people feel bad about themselves so the multi-million dollar companies can sell their “miracle” product, people are superficial.

As much as I despise these commercials, it’s clear – at least to me – that we have become the advertisers, putting down others so we can sell ourselves that much better. Is this the long-term effect of advertising, or are we just naturally vain?

Coffee + TV = Ghosts, Scientists say

2009-01-28T15:11:00.005-05:00

I recently came across two articles that caught my attention. Why, you may ask? Both mentioned the words “scientists” and “ghosts” in the same headline. But, before you get too excited, they didn’t say, “Scientists Prove Ghosts Exist.”

One article from Cold Spot: Paranormal Research and Investigation Unit, and the other from UK’s Glasgow Daily Record, suggest that when people see ghosts they aren’t actually seeing anything – although for two different reasons.

The Glasgow Daily Record reported that coffee drinkers (ie. those who drink more than SEVEN cups of instant coffee a day) are more likely to hallucinate and hear non-existent voices.

On the other hand, the Cold Spot article disclosed a study conducted by University College London, which suggests that when people see ghosts they’re simply “filling in the blanks” with their imagination.

I don’t doubt that either explanation is possible, but I don’t know anyone who drinks seven cups of coffee a day. And it just doesn’t seem logical that more than one person could experience the same phenomena at different times if they were using their own imagination. Plus, as I mentioned in my last post, there’s more to any experience than just what is seen.

If ghosts are a figment of the imagination, or the result of caffeine overdose, how have ghost stories and the belief in their existence lasted for centuries even without concrete, scientific proof? Even before coffee and scary movies existed?

The only answer I can think of is that ghosts do exist. After all, there’s no proof that they don’t.

(Image: Sci Fi UK)

Ghost Hunter's Tool Kit

2009-01-27T19:56:00.009-05:00

For most people, seeing is believing. But if you ask me, it’s hard to be “rational” about odd banging coming from empty rooms, scratching sounds on the bedroom window, inexplicably moved furniture, or that feeling of someone standing behind you even when there’s no one else in sight.

To be honest, I’ve never actually seen a ghost. I’ve been to so-called truly haunted places – Centre Island’s lighthouse, Fort Erie’s fort, Fort Erie’s Doll Museum – and nothing, nada, zilch.

By “nothing, nada, zilch,” what I really mean is I didn't see anything. I do remember feeling really creeped out, but in all fairness, it could have just been the dolls. (C’mon, you have to admit dolls are scary!)

The point is, if you’re planning to do your own ghost-hunt, there are a few things you can bring besides your eyeballs:

1) A flashlight – Assuming you go at night, you’ll want to see where you’re going

2) A compass – Often when a compass is acting wonky, it means there are certain electromagnetic impulses interfering with it; these impulses are sometimes attributed to ghostly activity.

3) A camera – Images of floating orbs and even silhouettes can be captured by a camera even though you may not see them with your own eyes. Plus, it’s nice to have some form of proof if you actually do see something a little odd.

4) Extra batteries – According to pretty much every ghost-hunting show out there, ghosts gain energy from electricity. Don’t be surprised if your batteries die faster than usual.

5) A friend – Possibly the most important tool, they’ll help keep you calm and provide another witness should something happen…

Unfortunately, it’s always possible that the ghost footage you see on paranormal investigation shows and the internet is fake. This video is one of the better ones I’ve found. Fake or not, it sure gave me a scare.

(Best to watch at night.)

10 Places to Scare Yourself

2009-01-26T20:46:00.008-05:00

Have I ever been to a cemetery at night? Once.
Would I ever go alone? Hmm...probably not.

Whether you’re a skeptic or a firm believer in the spirit world, a clichéd cemetery is just one place where you can test its existence – and your own bravery.

From the hours of Creepy Canada, Rescue Mediums, Most Haunted, and all those other ghost-hunting shows I’ve watched (with the lights on of course), I’ve come up with a top 10 list of potentially haunted places - or at least where creepy stuff tends to happen.

10. Cemeteries (duh)
9. Ships/Docks
8. Hotels
7. Castles/Forts
6. Churches
5. Schools
4. Country Roads
3. Jails/Prisons
2. The Woods
1. Houses

Visit The Shadowlands if you want to search the most haunted places in Canada. But keep in mind, it may involve a lot of scrolling down to find the city you're looking for.

Investigate if you dare...

(Image: Grihan.com)

Just to be Fair: Rathergate

2009-01-25T23:40:00.011-05:00

Since I’ve been giving FOX so much flak for its right-wing biases, racial stereotyping, fear-mongering, cluelessness about the definition of “fair” and “balanced,” and its unwavering support for the Bush Administration (to name a few), it’s only fair to mention that FOX isn’t the only network guilty of spinning the news – and in some cases, ignoring it completely.

While researching editorial cartoons for a school project – My topic was conspiracies. Go figure – I came upon something especially disturbing regarding CBS.

In 2007 CBS made headlines of its own after the network released long-time Evening News anchor Dan Rather, which prompted him to fire back with a $70 million lawsuit.

But he didn’t stop there.

For one, Rather accused CBS of purposely sitting on the Abu Ghraib story, the evidence for which had been discovered months before the images were released in April 2004.

As an even larger blow, Rather claims this - as well as many other skewed reporting - was done simply to placate the Bush Administration.

And it was only when a journalist at the New Yorker was about to scoop the story that CBS reacted and reluctantly unveiled the horrible truth about the US Military’s actions at Abu Ghraib.

Above is a cartoon (GoalsForAmericans.org) based off an actual photograph of the kind of torture being administered at Abu Ghraib. A prisoner was connected to a series of wires and told to stand on a box; he was told that if he fell off he would be electrocuted. As you can see from this image, the victim is Liberty.

Read Bill Van Auken's article if you want to know more details of Rather’s accusations.

(Trial still pending.)

Nas-ty Message to FOX

2009-01-22T19:42:00.014-05:00

“Subtle” doesn’t quite describe rapper Nas’s support for Barack Obama, or his views on FOX News’ treatment of the President (not to mention African Americans in general).

After FOX News’ referred to the First Lady as “Obama’s baby mama,” and made other hideous remarks about the couple, rapper Nas said what everyone with an ounce of sense is already thinking:

“Fox poisons the country with racist propaganda and tries to call it news.” (USA Today.)

While FOX normally labels him as another violent gangster rapper, it inspired the lyrics and video for his song, “Sly Fox.”

Here’s just a sample of what it’s all about:

They say I'm all about murder-murder and kill-kill
But what about Grindhouse and Kill Bill?
What about Cheney and Halliburton?
The backdoor deals
On oil fields
How's Nas the most violent person?
…Only Fox that I love is the red one
Only black man that Fox loves is in jail or a dead one

Make sure you watch/listen until the end, when the music fades and you’re left with a FOX News clip. The interviewee’s words are the last ones you hear, but they resonate even after the video’s over:

“He’s not the worst rapper around, but some of his lyrics are very violent and they really do have a point here.”

Beautiful!

Harper: Following the President's Lead (again)

2009-01-21T17:41:00.013-05:00

As a Canadian I felt a little a guilty paying so much attention to the American election, but out of those debates came one policy that’s especially relevant to Canadians – well, it’s certainly made an impression on Stephen Harper.

Harper plans to join forces, so to speak, on the new President’s plans for energy and the environment, specifically, a cap-and-trade system for greenhouse-gas emissions.

He’s hoping that through this shared system, and Barack Obama's promise to decrease dependency on oil from the Middle East, the cost and pollution of Canadian oil extraction won’t face harsh consequences. As a foreign-policy initiative, this isn’t a bad idea. But I can’t shake the feeling that Harper is just following the footsteps of another US President, and the reason for it couldn't have less to do with the environment.

This proposal, if accepted and followed through, will do more for the US than Canada since Americans already consume more Canadian oil than Canadians do themselves. What does this mean for the environment? A continually depleting ozone above Canada especially, where emissions continue to flow from both sides of the border.

And with the Alberta oil sands attracting more and more foreign inventors, I have to wonder if Canadians will reap the rewards, or if we’ll get stuck scraping the bottom of the barrel.

Obama to the Rescue!

2009-01-21T01:07:00.012-05:00

Woohoo, it’s official! Barack Obama is the new President of the US of A.

This was the first time I watched any presidential inauguration, and the first time I ever made a point to. But since I had no other comparison for “how things went” on inauguration days in the past, I decided to look them up on YouTube.

Oddly enough (insert sarcasm here) the first videos that popped up were protests against the previous President’s victory. Beneath them were comments from Bush supporters, who all seemed to share the view that the protesters were, basically, scumbags. One user even thought it was “ironic” that people would protest someone who’s responsible for upholding their right to protest.

Okay, if you can’t demonstrate your beliefs through protest, why would someone think they have the right to express theirs through any other means? (Like on YouTube, for example.)

But it’s not really that shocking, is it? That a self-professed Bush-fan would argue against the right to protest – or in other words, that whole First Amendment/Freedom of Speech-thing that serves as the foundation for a healthy democracy.

While “Democracy” has yet to be completely realized in the United States or elsewhere, seeing Obama’s inauguration I’m glad many of our southern neighbours had someone to vote for, rather than against; someone whose message they can actually care about and believe in; someone who’s “of the people, by the people, for the people,” as one of The Greats put it.

I guess only time will tell if he is.

(Image: iphonesavior.com)

That’s FOXed Up

2009-01-19T19:52:00.012-05:00

As the famous X-Files tagline states: “The truth is out there.” There’s just one question: How do we go about finding it? The obvious answer should be through research and investigation. But when the sources of information – who have the tools, means, and responsibility to research and investigate – fail to disclose the truth, what then?

(Note: Don’t be surprised when X-Files references occasionally pop up. It’s bound to happen from time to time.)

Before I take a crack at answering that, maybe I should clarify. We’re not (usually) outright lied to by the mainstream news media, but given a selected version of the truth. But as the documentary OUTFOXED shows, sometimes lying is part of the gig.

The stories we’re told are not only fictitious at times, but suggest that “objectivity” – in other words, what journalism is supposed to be – is also a lie. When journalists can’t do their job, what does that mean for democracy?

I don’t care if FOX is a conservative, Republican, Bush-idolizing news source, but if they’re going to be that obvious, they should just admit it. Maybe journalism had it right when partisan presses were the norm. At least then you knew when you were getting the facts and when you were getting commentary.

When Bill O’Reilly – shudder – tells his left-wing, anti-war, anti-Bush guests to “shut up,” how can FOX news morally, legally, logically, consider itself “fair and balanced”? What’s even more amazing is that anyone watching the show can think it is.

However, to be fair and balanced, the same can be said about the more recent coverage of Barack Obama and John McCain. I can’t think of one news channel – besides FOX, of course – that regularly cast Obama in a negative light. On the other hand, McCain tended to be the subject of ridicule, if not for his relationship with Bush, then for his incessant references to Joe the Plumber, and major attitude shift throughout the campaign - oh, I almost forgot, Sarah Palin too.

I’m not saying those criticisms weren’t founded – especially regarding Joe – but it was clear that neither candidate received equal coverage.

To get the opposing view, and to see a neat bar graph comparing Obama and McCain coverage, visit Donald Douglas’s blog. (Notice that he subscribes to the FOX newswire.)

The Vatican Wants You...to believe in aliens

2009-01-18T22:35:00.019-05:00

According to the Vatican’s chief astronomer – yeah, apparently they have astronomers – you can believe in God and the existence of aliens, and still go to Heaven.

An interview published in the Vatican newspaper – they have a newspaper too? – not only said that it’s possible that aliens could exist, but even suggested that not believing in aliens would question your faith in God. Rev. Jose Gabriel Funes claimed that doubting the existence of other intelligent life-forms would “place limits” on God’s creative powers.

Wow! How long did it take ‘em to think of that one? With yet another if-you-don’t-believe-this-you’re-not-going-to-Heaven argument, they’ve done it! They’ve appeased all the UFO “nuts”/alien believers/Roswell conspiracy theorists and welcomed them with open arms...so long as they understand that ET’s aren’t superior beings. Well, at least not to God.

When asked what alien life would mean for human redemption Funes said, “God was made man in Jesus to save us. In this way, if other intelligent beings existed, it is not said that they would have need of redemption. They could remain in full friendship with their Creator."

So, aliens aren’t superior to God, but they are superior to us. We’re the lost sheep, according to Funes.

Now, what this article is really saying is that we need the church to guide us and keep us in His good books, aliens or no aliens, as it has always been. But the worst part of the article? The cheesy title: “The Extraterrestrial is my Brother.”

But hey, who am I to judge? Catholicism’s just trying to keep up with the times – especially since now it also has Scientology to compete with.

Click here to read the full interview.

Okay, so it’s not exactly “breaking” news, but it was news to me.

Ode to The X-Files (kind of)

2009-01-17T21:49:00.007-05:00

Dear Mr. Carter,

I first discovered your show this past summer, and I must say, bravo! I loved coming home from work, kicking up my feet, and being immersed into the realm of all things paranormal. I just wanted to say thank you.

You told awesome stories. Stories filled with aliens, ghosts, and Fox (or should it be Foxy?) Mulder. Stories based on other stories that never seem to die – despite never being proven.

You showed me a world I could enjoy because its events were too bizarre, so far-off from my everyday experiences, and thus, clearly fictitious. There was nothing to fear because you made it all up. You just imagined those things; they would never happen in real life...right?

WRONG!

As far-fetched and twisted as your ideas were, they suggested possibility. Not only was it possible that aliens, ghosts, and even crap-eating sewer monsters could exist (okay, that last one’s a bit of a stretch...and gross), but that matters of “National Security” could be a matter of social concern, that the government might be keeping – GASP! – secrets from the public, or that news stories operating as fact are only a small selection of the facts, bent and manipulated to keep the secrets safe.

Thank you again, Chris Carter. Now ghosts don’t seem that scary.