smackley's mind phux

We are the most advanced humans there will ever be...

2010-05-14T06:57:00.000-07:00

A recent Science News article, found here, has laid claim to the idea that a single origin model of life on Earth has been un-deniably proven. While a statistical study has value in giving us the "odds" of it being a non-web hierarchy, isn't it kind of a misleading title? 10^2,5K odds that favor a single shared protein, but seems like the same or worse odds would be stacked against proteins forming life at all...and yet it happened. I think I just have a personal grudge against scientists claiming that statistics proves an non-testable true.

The more interesting, but probably more confusing point is made at the end of the article. He states that while he proves that all life we see today originated from one protein, it does not prove that the single protein model was not the only time life has arisen on Earth. So what he must mean is that he accepts the possibility that a completely unattached life model could have arisen in parallel, where resulting organisms formed from a separate protein. I'm sure he means to say that he believes a parallel model could exist but he believes they all died off without sharing proteins with the current life model...or they just existed in short bursts before existing life's model began its evolutionary time span.

For the sake of complexity, let's assume these parallel models all shared the same time of origin, and the fact that we don't see life of those parallel evolutionary models today is that they died off a long time before fossilized evidence could form (which would give rise to loopholes in our current model). That would lead us to believe that the reason the parallel models could not sustain life was that due to the fact that there was no common ancestry of proteins with our life model, it could not sustain life (i.e. the sharing of proteins or genetic combinations is a fundamental requirement for an evolutionary model to sustain life). To better picture this, imagine a tree growing from a seed, and growing fast. A different tree attempts to grow beside the first in the same primordial soil. The first tree grows fast and grows large enough to shade the second tree from life. The larger tree takes all the nutrients from the soil and blocks all the sun...the second tree eventually dies.

So that would mean that they've also inadvertently proven that rapid genetic sharing is a fundamental requirement in early evolution, and that in early evolution, Earth as a closed system, forced an evolutionary cap on the amount of branches it could sustain from independent life models. The first with the most branches wins. As genetic variation increases, however, the amount of branches sustained in a life model can be increased.

So, if we focus on the human branch, we have a current gene pool if we froze our planet population today. That would give us a snapshot picture of the "branches" in the human tree limb. If breeding amongst this current snapshot was carried out in every possible statistical variation, we would then hit our closed system's limitation point for sustained branches within a life model. Thus proving that the specie must be allowed to increase in population to spread and increase genetic variation in order to evolve.

So in order to evolve over an infinite time scale, we need to increase specie population infinitely over time. Unless we start populating the moon or outer space and maintaining the same rate of breeding amongst moon people/space people/Earth people, our closed system will prevent infinite population and halt evolution. Since we have sufficiently proved that our specie is nearly overpopulating our closed system already, we may have proved that our specie is already as "evolved" as we could ever be (non-synthetically).

So..this means that we are all the most advanced human specie ever...even those orange colored, Jager swilling pieces of trash from "Jersey Shore". Shit. If this is the most evolved we will ever be...we're all PHUXED.

Science is phuxing funny...

2010-02-23T13:38:00.005-08:00

I, ever the phony bologna science geek, always enjoy whenever the leaders in the scientific community make bold and punctuated statements that make me scratch my head. Not in a perplexed manner, but more in a WTF?…way.

Take this prize winner from Forbes.com (HERE).

“Individuals with Down syndrome, the most common genetic cause of mental retardation, carry an extra copy of chromosome 21 and, therefore, extra copies of each of the 231 genes found on that chromosome.

And while people with Down syndrome have an increased risk of developing certain types of leukemia compared to the general population, they have just 10 percent the risk of dying from many common solid-tumor cancers, including breast, brain, pancreas, lung and colon cancers.”

So in summary, the cure for cancer might be to have Down Syndrome? That’s retarded.

Sorry, too easy. But, it does have merit. Manipulation of chromosomes could provide crucial benefit for those who, genetically, do not have the extra chromosome. Let’s hope for science’s sake, that this hypothesis is fully tested before cancer sufferers line up to trade their cancer for Down Syndrome. Either way, why make this announcement now? This correlation isn’t newly formed. It was known as far back as 1950 when correlation studies for Down Syndrome were conducted. Did science think that we had forgotten just how hard they are working on cancer? I guess I just don’t understand the point in publishing hypothesis without testing, but what’s even more of a head scratcher is publishing a correlation study that has nearly zero value…

A two year study was conducted in order to bring visibility to the difference in height amongst different ethnicities/races in young children during growth phases (See HERE). The results were much as you’d expect: Blacks/Whites were tallest, followed by Asian/Hispanic children. What were they hoping to do? Are they saying that if an Asian family wants to have tall kids, they should have some black or white kids? How did they do this study?

Ok, ok. So I’m sure you could find merit somewhere, but to waste 2 years on it? Science is funny sometimes.

Smoking ban in your face...

2010-02-23T13:38:00.003-08:00

Here, in Raleigh, the senate has passed a bill prohibiting smoking in public areas, bars, and restaurants. It is causing quite a stir with the bar and club going crowd, as the argument against the bill focuses on the fact that going into establishments that allow smoking is a choice, and non-smokers can go ’somewhere’ else if they have a problem with that. The other argument being that bar and club owners have the constitutional right to decide how to run their own businesses (Mind you, in Raleigh, we have a strict ABC law requiring establishments not receiving at least 30% food based revenue to operate as a private membership based club).

Yes, if I hated the smoke in a bar, I could just go to one of several Raleigh non-smoking establishments. I have no right to ask bar owners how to run their bars. If that meant I couldn’t go to a single bar in Raleigh due to smokers, then I would have the in-alienable right to start my own bar for non-smokers. I don’t have any intention of supporting a law that prohibits any of you from enjoying your freedoms as you see fit, but I do see us all already breaking laws in place to begin with.

I would rather rename the ‘Restaurant and Night Club Smoking Ban’ bill to the ‘Enforcement of Existing Self Termination Laws Broadened to Attempted Long Term Progression of Self Termination’ bill. Let’s ignore the fact that you have the right to choose to go to a smoking establishment. Right now, it is illegal to attempt to kill yourself by jumping off a bridge. If caught doing so, you rarely see jail time, but are at the very least fined and remitted to Doctoral assistance. The ability to smoke can no better be prevented than the opportunity to jump off a bridge or buy pot, but it can be just as easily punished (or more positively – medicated, psychologically or pharmaceutically).

You are probably thinking to yourself, well smoking health effects are proven, but we each carry a statistical chance that we are genetically unable to contract any health problems from smoking within our lifetime and shouldn’t be punished for the ‘chance’ that we might kill ourselves. Fair enough, but current health sciences prohibit us from determining which SPECIFIC genetic make up is present in those that never contract smoking related illnesses from those who do. Therefore, there is no current way of knowing with any degree of certainty that you have, or don’t have, genetic precursors for or against smoking related health issues. That being true, you still have a chance of dying from smoking, and as such, at the very least are playing your odds. Just as the guy choosing to jump from the bridge has the chance that a massive flock of eagles will come to his safety before making splat, you have the chance that you will be fine… but is that still not attempted suicide?

Ignore the fact that a smoking section in a restaurant is like a pissing section in a swimming pool. The fact that the FDA has not prohibited the sale of cigarettes in this country, and the Fed hasn’t removed all the clusterfuck of guns from your dad’s apocalyptic gun trundle, doesn’t remove the fact that each of those genre of num nums pose a personal threat if misused or unregulated. Well shit, let’s not say regulation or the political right will start screaming SOCIALISM!

Fine, if you want your smokes have them. Light one and inhale in public view, though, and you should be fined for attempted suicide until cigarette manufacturers can either prove their product to contain no unhealthy ingredients, or the technology exists to verify whether you are immune or not. And just as in any law enforement goes, if you don’t want to get in trouble…don’t get caught right? So, smoke pot, smoke cigs, smoke fetus blood, but do it in private where you won’t get caught. In otherwords, get the PHUX out of my favorite bars and restaurants!

Or we could tax bullets and lighters causing gun shooters to make their own volitile ammunition, and smokers to light their smokes with stove tops — and Darwin will win outright again!

Phuxed

US Government.com

2010-02-23T13:38:00.001-08:00

I’m sure, unless you wear your own rectum as a hat 24 hours a day, you’ve heard about the whole AIG bonus scandal thing. Every news channel stateside has been loyally voicing the ‘well informed’ opinions their equally ‘informed’ viewers (Side note 1: 64% of Americans polled in 2006 did not know the name of the vice president, Side note 2: Roughly 30% of government officials in the US held higher education degrees from non-accredited online universities that are now non-existent, Side note 3: 2% of Bloggers and Blog readers are motivated enough to check facts and calculate percentages.). Let’s approach this issue carefully. I completely agree that Wall Street’s basis of monetary compensation is a bit backwards, but it is nearly comparable to how wait staff at restaurants are not paid by their employers…but by the patrons who have already paid for meals and marked up beverages.

The difference here is that these Wall Street executives were terrible at foreseeing domino collapse emergencies as well as being terrible at making eye contact, making sure our glasses remain full, and flirting a bit by wearing low cut shirts when serving us hot wings; thus justifying the socially progressive female equality in the workforce paradigm. Let’s ignore the fact that AIG received $80 billion in first round TARP payments in order to meet it’s “insured” agreements, that we already paid most of those “insured” parties their ‘owed’ billions in first round TARP funding, and that the original agreements between insuring agencies like AIG and the banks issuing toxic loans is essentially a closed loop fiscal system similar to car insurance and medical insurance (the majority of people making monthly payments create a greater monetary pool than those few people cashing in on their insurance…and even if everybody cashed in on a rare occurrence, those insurance companies would have priced their services adequately to break even). Once we ignore those key factors, we can approach the real issue… the internet is going to kill everything!

Why? Well, just as TV news has made printed newspapers no more than an archaic tradition, internet has finally proved TV news is too slow to keep up with all the garbage that the unemployed journalism majors of this country come up with while writing articles on their mac books in the coffee shop nearest the trendy local downtown apartment building while wearing their clever looking sweater and very very moderate prescriptions glasses while simultaneously hoping to bump into their soul mate who is fatefully ordering the same diarrhetic latte they did… or something.

Think about it. How long after the first article on the net, speaking to the attrocities of the AIG bonus scandal, was written did it take for Washington D.C. to voice its distaste for the whole thing? One entire half of a whole day. It took less than three weeks for congress to pass a bill requiring AIG exec’s to pay a 90% tax. It did stall in the Senate, due to lack of support in the whitehouse (smokescreen anybody?), but when the FACK has congress ever worked that fast!? The fact that congress has had this many meetings, oversight committee reviews, and actual legislative movement over something citizens have had no actual voting over…just a bunch of un-informed frantics…proves that the future is bleak for government in this country.

As reality TV and rediculous scare tactics continue to entertain all of us, we will use the internet to vent our oh-so-motivated outcries for change and the rest of media will continue to overreact in hopes to appear relevant and modern. The government will continue to react just as quickly, without giving the proper experts enough time to calculate consequences. Soon, we will no longer physically vote for anything all together…there is no need. Even future internet voting will be replaced by internet pandemic. Members of Congress and Senate, elected to represent citizens, will no longer be necessary since nearly %100 of citizens will have internet access in order to voice their opinions directly to the whitehouse; while simultaneously surfing goat porn. We will have the worlds first real-time government!

Go back to the notes at the top, where we recognize the majority of this country’s citizens are uninformed/unmotivated/socially retarded, and let’s think about what a real-time government would mean for us as a whole. We’re phuxed.

Sarah McLachlin looks like an abused daschund.

2010-02-23T13:37:00.003-08:00

Somehow defying my distaste for all pets that you can fit in a microwave, I have a pet kitty cat. She brings me great joy and I’ve spent a great deal of money keeping her healthy. However, I still know she’s a cat, not a people, and if I’m put in a dire situation…the cat loses out. In a post nuclear apocalypse, I would eat my cat. It’s just natural selection, and I’m okay with this.

So when my laughter filled episode of Family Guy gets interrupted by the anti-bonerizing Sarah McLachlin and her flock of abused puppy fuck, imagine my dismay when she asks me to “have a heart” and shell out the measley $31 every month to save the poor abused animals of the world. Let’s see here… In South Asia alone, more than 90 million children go hungry every day. Nearly 20% of the world’s children do not have safe water to drink… and this cunt nugget wants me to give two flippiddy doo dads about an abused dog whose breed would not naturally survive in any wilderness, including Boca Raton? Ha. And that song she plays, “In the arms of an Angel”. You could play that song while watching me eat a hamburger, and you would probably feel sad for the cow.

But that’s it, isn’t it? Let’s solve these problems with the most practical solution. How do you feed the children of the world whilst putting the abused animals of the world out of their misery? Yum. It’s not like eating dog hasn’t been tried in South Asia before anyways right?

And when they’re all good and well fed, we’ll stop telling those kids that babies come from fairy dust and teach them to use a fricken condoms for recreational penetration. It is a proven fact that kids do better in school when they are well fed, and I think that we are on the right track to wiping out over-population, AIDS, poverty, as well as the overpopulation of abused animals. Otherwise, keep donating your money and join the impoverished ranks as we all get PHUXED.

Assuming the Universe

2010-02-23T13:37:00.001-08:00

So this Valentine’s Day I was looking to get my girlfriend a really corny sappy gift, so I thought about doing one of those “name a star after her” ideas. I found websites for several agencies claming they were “the” legitamite site for naming and purchasing a star. I picked the one that sounded the most official (it’s a crock anyways right?) and started searching the available names. As is common with domain purchasing, I figured I would find that my girlfriend’s name would have been already purchased for a star, but even still… an infinity of space would seem to allow for some room to work with. After a few querries, I started to feel a bit odd about the concept of naming a star.

Perhaps it was after seeing that both “Poopsy Doopsy 22113″ and “HampsterPenisCramps” were already taken, or maybe after reading that (some how with the infinity of known universe) this legit agency is claiming they can boast the statistic of naming nearly a whole percent of the stars out there, but at some point I thought it was a bit pompous of the human specie to believe we had any fucking right to be naming stars as we please. At this rate, odds are at some point in the distant future, we will have named nearly every single star we can see from our vantage point, and at that point nearly %16 of those will be named ” Happy Birthday Sarah”, %6 named “I love you smoochy butt”, and a quaint 3 trillion stars will be named “Dickfore”. By the time we’ve named all of these stars, I’m sure we’ll have begun naming planets we find, meteors, moons, black holes, and finite numbers of space dust all in the quest for a cheaply romantic gift. With a click of the mouse, we will be naming whole galaxies and solar systems. Ad agencies will be offering to name whole star clusters after products and services in a clever advertising scheme.

Now let’s get creative. Let’s say in this distant future, at least 1 out of the last 8 fucking inplausible sci-fi movies comes true and aliens from a distant world come to wipe us off the face of our planet. We’ll be wondering why we’re getting our asses lasered, and it won’t be so that they can harvest our bones or terraform our planet. It’ll be because the facking aliens Googled themselves only to find that we’ve decided they hale from planet ‘Skullfuck’ in the ‘Chris Love Suzy BFF Kisses’ System. We’re Phuxed.

The Penis Game

2010-02-23T13:36:00.000-08:00

I’ve recently stumbled onto a funny game to play with my girlfriend that I think needs sharing. I call it the “What if this was my penis?” game. It’s really simple, and there’s no need to literally get phallic here. Just pick either another appendage of your body, or an object nearby, and ask your girlfriend “what if this was my penis?”. Then proceed to place it near her in ways that would totally disgust her if it were actually your penis. The funny thing is, she will respond with the same disgust as if it WERE your penis. It’s hilarious!

So when your lying on the couch watching Grey’s Anatomy or some other dribble, take the remote and ask her the key question. Then place the remote on her head, then in her ear. HA! It is too funny to even think about. Then, when you’ve had your fill of level one…step it up a notch and use two objects. That’s right. Two penises. I promise she’ll equally squirm from both objects.

Enjoy your new game. I’ve got to run. Tonight it’s “Octapenis!” during The Office (puke).

That's Fucking Cheetah!

2010-02-23T13:35:00.000-08:00

Ever wonder how a phrase got started? I do. I spend wasteful amounts of time trying to figure out the origins of dumb verbage and maneurisms we use everyday. I’m not talking about the date and place a phrase was conceived, but more the facking reason the phrase came to the mind of the little chucklehead that was clever enough to do the conceiving. “That’s cool” for instance. Something that’s cool is excellent or well liked. So excellence is a measure of the absence of heat. So a level headed girl with a low metabolic rate is a ‘cool chick’, but be wary of the level of heat removed. If that same chick cheated on all of her boyfriends she’d just be a ‘cold hearted bitch’. Too cold and you lose your excellence. But that cold hearted bitch might have legs to her neck and a front balcony you could do shakespeare from…so she’d be a ‘hot ass cold hearted bitch’. Now we have interfering heat theory.

‘That’s cool’

That phrase gets used so often that I imagine it has broken free from the limitations of a generational shelf life. “That’s Tubular!” and “that’s totally rad!”, synonious to being cool, both died out after the late 80’s/ early 90’s generations stopped being cool. And unless hipsters can find a way to revive late 80’s lingo like they did the clothing and music, I’m pretty sure things will continue being ‘cool’…that is unless we try.

If I died tomorrow, I’m pretty sure the only canditory thing I’ve done for attaining any spot in history would be my paradoxial theory on time traveling masterbation (If you from the future jerked you off, is it gay or masterbation?). As it stands, I don’t see that theory catapulting my name into the list of our time’s greatest thinkers, so I’ve got a plan. I want to start a common use phrase. I don’t care if it’s a phrase that dies with my generation, just so long as we give “that’s cool” a run for its money. And since animal planet is on right now, and I’m watching a cheetah chase down and maul the shit out this giant vulture (the coolest fucking thing I’ve seen in weeks), our new phrase henceforth for all things cool is…

“that’s fucking cheetah”... or "Baller Ass Titties!!!" I don't really care. K, bye.