The Logistics of Ending the World

Posted on

So, I was thinking…all (or most) of these doomsday “prophesies” have as specific day and usually a specific time attached to them.

But wait? How can the world end that why if the world doesn’t work that why?

There are different timezones and at any time in the world, there world usually crosses two dates. Assuming the world was going to end, how are you going to account for the different timezones to die off at the prescribed date and time?

So on doomsday, does the world just die off timezone by timezone?

If you want to make a realistic apocalyptic prophesy, you need to make it more specific, by specifying a  timezone – and even if you did that to coincide with earthly event – it is possible that not all parts of the world will be the same. So only parts of the world will end?

Or you need to make it vague….like between X day and X day or like say, 4 billion years from now. That is the most realistic I think because since the timezones are all different, it’s difficult to accurately gauge a certain day even if you know that say, giant rock is coming….or if there is a large part of uncertainty, like super volcanoes blowing up or the sun expanding (before dying).

Am I overanalyzing the end of the world? Apocalypse how?

Freeforming and Freeroaming

Posted on

I am a wander, wandering
alone, back and forth
around, to and fro
oblivious to this world,
lost in my own
thoughts, dreams and things
that escape this reality

But people don’t like this
think it’s odd
think it’s strange
think it’s weird

People don’t like things that are
unright
but not wrong, just unright
unconforming,
and instead –
freeforming and freeroaming

“Are you okay?”
“Are you alright?”
“Are you lost?”

I am okay
I am alright
I am still here
and I will wander about
under the trees where
I walk, bolt, prance
out of this world and into my own
where everything is better than fine

(Though I really wish you
annoying people weren’t here
and that you don’t bug me
and if you would please kindly
consider shutting the hell up
and getting yourself far away
instead of trying to elicit
a reaction from me)

Inspired by last evening’s wander. (“Are you okay?” Giggles. “I don’t get it, she just walks around…”). Sigh. Some days, I’m not sure how much longer I can stand living here. Ugh. And yeah,  I may have made up a word in this poem…sort of but not really.  Freeform is a word, it’s just that maybe freeforming isn’t? (According to dictionary.com) Anyway, I like it so I’m using it.

What I Hate About Society

Posted on

I hate people. Sort of.  Not really. But sort of.  Also, I don’t hate all people, just people in general as a group.

  • Greetings (awkward)
  • Etiquette and manners (awkward)
  • Greed (I think the species is powered on it. Face it. We all are.)
  • Hypocrisy (not doing what they claim to believe in/contraindication)
  • Obsession with money clouding what’s important (oh well, it doesn’t matter if it destroys all that if it makes a lot of money…I mean we’re probably eventually wipe ourselves off the planet if we all keep doing that, but hey we made a lot of money!)
  • Lies (unless they are so ludicrous and blatant that they are hilarious)
  • Fake laughter and smiles (I can see you’re faking it. Stop it! It’s not “nice” either.)
  • Fixation on shallow things (reality shows, video games etc)
  • Obsessing on the current health “recommendation/warning” of the day (that is later proved false and probably had questionable validity to begin with or for sure we’ll be laughing our socks off in twenty years and future generations will be rolling around laughing  in a century from now…)
  • The assumption that humans are the greatest species to grace this universe. Ever. Seriously, the species superiority of humans is outstanding.  (Animals? We’re not animals, we’re people! As if people are some sort of category completely independent from all other living organisms.)
I also hate people. Such as these types:
  • People with no sense of humour
  • People with no sense of sarcasm
  • People with no sense of logical reason (unless again, it is so ludicrous that it is hilarious then I like it because it’s funny)
  • People who are obsessed with manners, greetings and other social norms
  • People who are obsessed with “cleanliness”  (like dirt…I mean really? Please.)
  • People who keep trying to greet me even though it’s clear that I’m having none of that
  • People who are overly strict
  • People who assume I’m a dictionary (or even a thesaurus sometimes!) because I’m an English major even though I somehow manage to suck at spelling
  • People who are evil. Duh.

Highlights: Everyone Fell Off!!

Posted on

Well, not everyone. Just most people, according to the highlights anyway. A little late, I know but I just didn’t publish this post on time!

The mainstream sports media amuses and annoys me for their coverage of equestrian events this Olympics (London 2012).

This is especially true with the cross country “highlights” on July 30 for eventing.  Their idea of “highlights” for that sport is basically “today on the cross-country course, everyone fell off.  Especially the Canadians.”

Seriously? “Everyone fell off” is your idea of  so-called “highlights? I thought highlights were called highlights for a reason! To you know, tell you how it’s going and who advanced – the high points of the day. But these eventing highlights were sort of  like having a figure-skating highlights full of people falling on their butt.  Maybe there are figure skating highlights almost solely consisting of skaters falling but I don’t think that is the norm…they normally mention who advanced at least.  This is all admittedly kind of funny in an odd/pathetic way.

But people (and/or horses) falling are not “highlights”! Unless these sports journalists are actually shocked that sometimes people fall off the horse…since apparently the rider just “sits there”, which is totally not true. Maybe it sounds weird but the rider has to do something too, besides stay on!

Also by the way, most riders did not fall off during the cross country course, it’s just the alleged highlights made it sound they did. True, most of the Canadians did get eliminated somehow but most people did complete the course. It’s funny how they barely mention those that made it through and decided to focus on people and horses falling instead. So it was more like “spectacular ways to get eliminated”. Not exactly the pinnacle of sport, you know? But the thing is that didn’t even happen to most riders! I guess the everyone who went clear was too boring so they went for the thrills and spills.

It also annoys me with some of the sports broadcasters refer to “equestrian” as one sport. It’s not. They are somewhat related but they are three different sports: dressage, show jumping and eventing (dressage, cross country, jumping).

I’m not an eventer (besides, I’m a big chicken and haven’t jumped for years) but I do ride recreationally.  Of course, I’ve fallen off many times and I can’t say it was an “highlight” necessarily…maybe the highlight of hilarity in hindsight and/or excitement and/or great stories but not exactly the “highlight” as a sport.

So everyone fell off.  Well, they didn’t but the highlights made it seem that way. Well, at least people can remark less on “the horse does all the work”. Also, I think anyone that says “the horse does all the work” should be made to do a English riding lesson (not a leisurely trail ride) at at least a trot and/or canter, on either a really lazy and/or really strong horse, possibly without stirrups (especially if the horse is bouncy) and then tell us that “the horse does all the work”.   And then tell us the same thing the following day. Hmmphh.

A Houyhnhnm for Sale

Posted on

I amuse myself in various ways. This is one of them. This is spoof horse sales ad for a Houyhnhnm (pronounced wín-im). For those without an Literary background, the Land of Houyhnhnm is the last land from Gulliver’s Travels by Johnathan Swift. There Gulliver finds houyhnhnms, which are a breed of super intelligent, rational horses with a society based only on reason. They are very peaceful and have no word for lying or falsehood. They regard humans as dumb “yahoos” and generally disregard them. However, houyhnhnms do not feel love or happiness or grief or anything really (very non-emotional) and are racist to the point of eugenics when breeding (they breed based on what’s best for their species, not on love). Yes, it’s a satire (this is from the same guy who wrote that we-shall-eat-poor-Irish-children essay “A Modest Proposal”).

Maybe I have values dissonance (and thus, sort of missing the point) but I don’t really feel that their “human” price of their obsession for reason is that bad as it makes sense to me and it is perfectly logical.  Okay, so maybe breeding not for love seems cold – but if most of your species agreed to it and it made your species stronger – what’s the problem? Love is irreverent if it never really existed in your species.  See, I think that is the problem with humans – we are completely unable to look beyond our own values as a species/society but that is another rant for another time.  But that is probably since I don’t have a lot of human/emotional connection at all and love is just abstraction to me…or maybe I’m a Houyhnhnm is disguise!  It would explain a lot of things, really…

Oh and 1726 is the publication year of Gulliver’s Travels I think…

Background Info

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houyhnhnm
Gulliver’s Travels Part IV: A Voyage to the Houyhnhnms- a Project Gutenberg ebook

Authentic Houyhnhnm

1726 16hh jet black Houyhnhnm stallion. Beautiful, sophisticated black Houyhnhnm imported from the Land of Houyhnhnms. Learns very fast and is extremely, extremely, extremely smart! Be the owner of one of the most intelligent equids…ever! Huge personality! Very honest. Never spooks, very rational. Very clean – will pick up after himself and even help clean the farm. Enjoys deep analytical, logical, philosophical discussions. Will be excellent for the disciplines of debating, logic competitions, championship chess and other logic-based strategic activities. Excellent for single philosophers, debaters, scientists, geniuses and self-proclaimed “geniuses” or anyone who enjoys intelligent engagement with a being in civil, rational ways. Fluent and literate in native language of Houyhnhnm, understands Yahoo Language (English variant) but generally does not care to speak it (though is able to). Prefers to communicate in Houyhnhnm.

Never gets attached to other herdmates. Never fights, is peaceful and nonviolent – believes everything can be solved with calm and logical thought. Is not easily distracted or moody. Detests displays of affection, finds it too primitive. Enjoys naturalistic art. For companion only – is 100% sound but constantly engages in deep logical argumentative discussions as a form of protest. For experienced people only as will get into a philosophical argument that rivals Plato every time something is asked of him. May not respect humans he does not know very well, assumes them as “yahoos”. Not to be stalled as he will scientifically and rationally figure out how to escape a barn and will be extremely cross. Not recommended for beginners, yahoos, bleeding hearts, emotional people or those who think or reason emotionally. Is ridable if one a Houyhnhnm whisperer (not to be confused with a horse whisperer) or has a IQ of 300 with exceptional arguing and logic skills who can convince him that it is perfectly logical and reasonable to have a yahoo on his back and physically exert himself. Can be gelded if you can convince him that it is a good idea – (he claims gelding is a profound inference with nature, especially for a fine genetic specimen such as himself). A great spouse replacement for an intelligent person who feels that his/her mate (or ex-mate) is irritatingly too emotional and also annoyingly not bright or logical enough.

For more information, contact Lemuel Gulliver or Johnathan Swift (by mail or in person – telegraphs, phones and the internet do not exist in their time bubble. They apologise for any inconvenience.)