Rocket Scientists Not as Smart as Originally Thought

Rocket Scientists Not as Smart as Originally Thought
New Findings in Study Commissioned by Brain Surgeons

Rocket scientists, long considered the gold standard in intelligence among all professionals, are not nearly as smart as originally thought, according to a controversial new study published today by the American Association of Brain Surgeons.

The study, which appears in the organization’s monthly publication, Popular Brain Surgery, is entitled “The Intelligence of Rocket Scientists: Myth Versus Reality,” and suggests that rocket scientists’ reputation for smartness is largely undeserved.

“It does require a superior intellect to function as a rocket scientist,” the article concedes. “Having said that, though, rocket science is not brain surgery.”

The article drew an immediate rebuke from a spokesperson for the American Society of Rocket Scientists, who blasted the study as “state-of-the-art pro-brain surgeon propaganda.”

“As rocket scientists, we take offense at this naked attempt by a devious cabal of opportunistic brain surgeons to supplant us as the smartest people on the planet,” the spokesperson said. “If rocket science is so easy, we’d like to see these so-called brain surgeons give it a try one of these days.”

Professor Davis Logsdon, a University of Minnesota expert who studies the turf wars between rocket scientists and brain surgeons, said that he believes the latest controversy between the two groups has been overplayed.

“The fact of the matter is, the smartest people in the world have always been, and will always be, University of Minnesota experts,” he said.

Leia Mais…

Introducing the Hot New Social Network, PhoneBook

SILICON VALLEY – A new social network is about to alter the playing field of the social media world, and it’s called PhoneBook.

According to its creators, who invented the network in their dorm room at Berkeley, PhoneBook is the game-changer that will leave Facebook, Twitter and even the much anticipated Google Buzz in a cloud of dust.

“With PhoneBook, you have a book that has a list of all your friends in the city, plus everyone else who lives there,” says Danny Fruber, one of PhoneBook’s creators.

“When you want to chat with a friend, you look them up in PhoneBook, and find their unique PhoneBook number,” Fruber explains. “Then you enter that number into your phone and it connects you directly to them.”

Another breakout utility of PhoneBook allows the user to arrange face-to-face meetings with his or her friends at restaurants, bars, and other “places,” as Fruber calls them.

“You will be sitting right across from your friend and seeing them in 3-D,” he said. “It’s like Skype, only without the headset.”

PhoneBook will enable friends to play many games as well, such as charades, cards, and a game Fruber believes will be a breakout: Farm.

“In Farm, you have an actual farm where you raise real crops and livestock,” he says. “It’s hard work, but it’s more fun than our Mafia game, where you actually get killed.”

Leia Mais…

leftist slant of the media

These days, the biased leftist slant of the media is more apparent than it has ever been. They are spinning madly, increasingly frantic with fear of those super scary Tea Partiers and oh-so-terrifying conservatives. And when you add Sarah Palin and race-based identity politics into the mix, it becomes a perfect storm of unabashed — and unbalanced — leftist water carrying.


The Washington Post’s Richard Cohen is the latest to exhibit just how unglued the Left and the media, being concentric circles on a Venn diagram, natch, have become. Newsbusters points out that in the article titled “Attack on Michelle Obama shows Palin’s ignorance of history,” Cohen comes to the inane, and typically leftist, conclusion that Sarah Palin “could not be the president of black America nor of Hispanic America.” Um. Sure, I’m no swanky-pants Washington Post columnist, nor do I even have the vast experience of a community organizer from which to draw, but I’m fairly certain that the presidency isn’t segregated.

Can’t let pesky facts stand in the way of a hit piece, though, can he? How does Cohen form his brilliant – and sure-fire entre into a good cocktail party this weekend – hypothesis? Because Sarah Palin dares to mention the following in her new book:

In her new book, she reportedly takes Michelle Obama to task for her supposedly infamous remark from the 2008 campaign: “For the first time in my adult life, I am proud of my country because it feels like hope is finally making a comeback.” [...]

Huh. Again, I’m no expert, but it seems to me that Michelle Obama actually did say that. So, by “taking her to task,” he of course means smearing with, you know, the truth. Oh, that wing-nutty Palin! Telling the truth and all. That’s so reactionary and old school! I suppose they don’t like that whole “Truth to Power” thing turned around on them. The book snippet to which he refers is as follows:

Certainly his wife expressed this view when she said during the 2008 campaign that she had never felt proud of her country until her husband started winning elections. In retrospect, I guess this shouldn’t surprise us, since both of them spent almost two decades in the pews of the Reverend Jeremiah Wright’s church listening to his rants against America and white people.

Cohen isn’t alone in his delusions. The Huffington Post called that passage “racially charged.” Why? Because the Left, in their stomp my foot temper tantrums, are letting their true colors show. And they are racist ones. It is the Left who only sees color. It is the Left who paints people into identity politics laden boxes only, in order to further their own end. They use people as a means to that end, with no regard to the harm it causes. This is evidenced further by Cohen, who after predictably bringing up slavery, went on to grossly say this:

Sarah Palin teases that she might run for president. But she is unqualified – not just in the (let me count the) usual ways, but because she does not know the country. She could not be the president of black America nor of Hispanic America. She knows more about grizzlies than she does about African Americans – and she clearly has more interest in the former than the latter. Did she once just pick up the phone and ask Michelle Obama what she meant by her remark? Did she ask about her background? What it was like at Princeton? What it was like for her parents or her grandparents? I can offer a hint. If they were driving to Washington, they slowed down and stopped where the sign said “colored” – and the irritated Palins of the time angrily hit the horn and went on their way.

Not only vile, but wrong. It is the Left who are still enslaving. They require people, particularly women and minorities, to walk and think in lockstep. It is people like Barbara Boxer, not Sarah Palin, who have no interest in African-Americans and what they think. Barbara Boxer doesn’t even realize that people have minds of their own. In a new version of the odious “y’all look alike’ bigotry, Barbara Boxer holds the disgusting belief that all people in the Left’s little boxed up identity groups must all think the same way. All “you people” think the same, you see. It was Harry Reid, not Sarah Palin, who condescending sneered “I don’t know how anyone of Hispanic heritage could be a Republican.”

The Smarter Than Us ™ Left, including their media lackeys, doesn’t believe in Post-Racial anything. In fact, quite the opposite: Their bread and butter is identity politics. In order to maintain power, they absolutely must put everyone in victim boxes and attempt to pit people against one and another. This worked to great effect in the past, with the media’s complicity. It’s far past time we put an end to it. While I expect the vitriol and animus spewed at Sarah Palin to get even worse, unbelievable as that is, the media’s cover has been blown. The media has been, and will continue to be, exposed due in part to the hateful and delusional rantings of the likes of Richard Cohen.

To be fair, Richard Cohen, you are right in one regard. Sarah Palin couldn’t be president of black America. Because that isn’t, you know, a country. Contrary to your desires, and to John Edwards’ ridiculous Two Americas spiel, we are one nation. You, sir, are the one who is ignorant of history. First grade history, no less.

We don’t have segregated presidencies. Nor should we. The very idea is racist in and of itself. What we do have are presidents of the United States of America.

Leia Mais…

Net Neutrality ? WTF People

I know it’s a big day for when I wake up and my Email Inbox is jammed full with Emails, the majority fundamentally saying the same thing: The FCC is on the move. I’m told it all goes back to a November 15 speech by FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, in which he expresses urgency for the FCC to pass a bunch of new rules quickly. It’s a crisis, he says.

He then called out Google and Verizon, saying that their temerity to contribute to the debate “slowed down some other processes.” You see: the whole process of talking to industry is apparently a sham, and the only speech that counts is speech that leads the FCC closer to the Obama administration’s predetermined outcome.

And it’s that Net Neutrality outcome we may be nearing after all. That’s the Red Alert.

Seton Motley at Big Government brings us the key story: He’s now claiming that we must pass industry-crippling Net Neutrality restrictions in order to expand broadband access in America, and using that as the leverage to justify Title II reclassification. “That’ll happen,” he says. And further he’s going to gun hard for wireless services, something that Henry Waxman’s bill didn’t dare do, proving once again that the FCC is far outside the mainstream of even Congressional Democrats. Here’s Politico on the story, as well.

And worst of all: The plan is to launch it while Republicans are home for Thanksgiving, and then pass it two weeks before Christmas, three weeks before Republicans take control of the House. These dates and times are designed to minimize public debate on the matter as well as to minimize the impact of the 2010 elections on the process. Everything is chosen to silence and thwart popular will.

Hold on and get loud. This is crunch time.

More Net Neutrality? You betcha. Precursor Blog chimes in, arguing against the recent speeches by Julius Genachowski and for the need for freedom online, not government-dictated “neutrality.”

House Republicans of the Energy and Commerce Committee, led by Ranking Member Joe Barton, have also written a letter to Genachowski, warning him that his plans to circumvent Republican victory are “a mistake.” They know when their rightful Constitutional powers are being subverted.

FYI: I’m told that the currently-in-progress SB 3804 is a dangerous bill to watch, giving the government expansive new powers online in the name of copyright protection. Copyright used to be a matter of civil law, before the MPAA convinced the feds to start doing their dirty work for them. That’s why FBI notices appear on home releases of movies. Now it’s increasingly criminalized, even as copyright is also increasingly extended. Copyright today would be unrecognizable to the founding fathers, who put the concept into the Constitution with the express warning that copyright be limited in duration.

Having gotten tired of serving up waffles to the FCC, Free Press radicals are now writing bad poetry for Net Neutrality. It’s theater. It’s not debate.

Oh, and I hate to end on a downer, but the White House CTO says the administration will step up tech efforts next year. Whoever we have head the House committee, whether Barton or someone else, had best be ready to fight back.

Leia Mais…

Why Leftists hate the Palins.

A Vermont man shot his television set after watching as Bristol Palin, daughter of Former Governor and former vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin (R-AK) lived to dance another day on the television program Dancing With the Stars.

[Sixty-seven year old Steve] Cowan “jumped up and swore, saying something to the effect of “the fucking politics.”The complaint added, Steven was upset that a political figure’s daughter was dancing on this particular show when he did not think she was a good dancer.”

I’ve been saying for some time that the unhinged hatred that Leftists have for Bristol and her mother is spiritually-induced, from the bad side-- which is why it's illogical--and here's what it's about: abortion.

The label "pro-choice" is pure BS; most of its proponents should properly be labeled 'pro-abortion.' And for those who have successful convinced all too many women that abortion isn't really murder; for those who have fooled women of the "wrong genetic sort" into believing that they aren't doing the elites' bidding when they cut off their succeeding generations, Sarah and Bristol Palin are two of the most dangerous women in America.

Both Palins chose to let their children live under two of the "adverse" circumstances which are usually used to justify abortion. By doing so, the two set examples for other women and may plant the idea in other women that they need not murder their own children under similar circumstances. This is why the Palins often cause a full-blown, foaming, freak-out in many of those who adhere to Leftist ideology or who have been brain-washed by it, even when something as inconsequential as winning favor on a reality show is the subject at hand. (Then there are the women who are still playing out their high school-engendered neuroses, but that's a separate issue.)

I bet this Cowan has marched in a pro-"choice" rally or two, probably because his wife nagged him into doing it.

A spiritual battle? Yes. The force of evil--Satan--wants us all destroyed and those who justify the murder of the unborn are merely his tools. This is why the pro-abortionists are so rabid about those who defend innocent life. "Noooo, don't take away my right to commit genocide again myself, you brute!!!!"

To Leftists, Sarah and Bristol Palin made the "wrong" choice--life--and for that, the morally bankrupt must demonize them, inverting wrong and right as such people--and their Father--are wont to do. That this genius only hurt his TV is something for which to be thankful.

Leia Mais…

10 reasons why Barack Obama is the most naïve president in US history

1. Obama believes unilateral disarmament will achieve a nuclear-free world

The Obama administration may dream of a day when the world is free of nuclear weapons, but its lofty vision bears no relation to the realities of the modern world. Even the president of France believes that President Obama needs to live in the real world, not a virtual one, which is a rather damning indictment of US leadership. There is not a shred of evidence to suggest that Washington’s decision to cut its nuclear arsenal will encourage the likes of Iran and North Korea to disarm, and history has shown that a unilateral policy of disarmament will not prompt tyrannical regimes to change their behavior.

2. Obama thinks evil regimes can be negotiated with

The naïve appeasement of practically every odious tyranny on the face of the earth has been a central hallmark of Barack Obama’s foreign policy. From extending the hand of friendship to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Hugo Chavez, to turning a blind eye to horrific human rights abuses in Iran, Sudan, Zimbabwe and Burma, the Obama administration has made the art of appeasement into an art form under the guise of “smart power”. It is a morally bankrupt approach to foreign policy, epitomized by the words of Obama’s special envoy to Sudan, retired Air Force Major General J. Scott Gration, who declared:

“We’ve got to think about giving out cookies. Kids, countries — they react to gold stars, smiley faces, handshakes, agreements, talk, engagement.”

3. Obama doesn’t believe America is fighting a global war

Within weeks of taking office, the Obama administration dropped the phrase “Global War on Terror” in favor of “Overseas Contingency Operation”, and has gone to great lengths since then to emphasize that the United States is not engaged in a world wide war against Islamist terrorists who seek the destruction of America. As Vice President Joe Biden put it at last year’s Munich Security Conference, the US was involved in “a shared struggle against extremism” and a fight against “a small number of violent extremists (who) are beyond the call of reason”. Can you imagine Winston Churchill or Franklin D. Roosevelt declaring in 1943 that World War Two was a mere “struggle” against a small band of fascist extremists? Al-Qaeda killed over 3,000 Americans on 9/11, and their sole aim is the destruction of the West and the establishment of an Islamist caliphate. If that’s not a declaration of war I don’t know what is.

4. Obama believes increasing spending and raising taxes leads to prosperity

While even the Germans are balking at spending more taxpayers’ money to stimulate the economy or bail out failing members of the Euro zone, the Obama administration seems determined to build up ever greater levels of government debt, with vastly expanded entitlement programs and government spending. At the same time, Paul Volcker, its chief economic adviser, is dangling the prospect of additional European-style taxes to pay for it all, the surest way to kill economic growth and stifle job creation. As the recent success of countries like Hong Kong, Singapore, Australia and New Zealand attest, economic growth and prosperity is directly linked to limited government intervention, low taxation, and above all, economic freedom.

5. Obama thinks government-run health care is good for America

In the face of overwhelming public opposition, Barack Obama’s health care reform legislation represents the biggest expansion of government power in over 70 years, and is a major step towards a government-run health care system. It is a hugely naïve and risky social experiment in a nation whose success has always been driven by the principle of individual freedom. As I noted before, what we have just witnessed is a massive slap in the face for limited government and the principle of individual responsibility. Its net result will be the erosion of freedom in America, and a further undermining of the country’s economic competitiveness. This may be a political victory for the president and his supporters in Congress, but it is in reality a defeat for America as a great power, and another Obama-led step towards US decline.

6. Obama doesn’t believe in American exceptionalism

President Obama has made it clear that he doesn’t think that American exceptionalism is any different to the “exceptionalism” of other countries. He also believes that “no one nation can or should try to dominate another nation. No world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will succeed. No balance of power among nations will hold.” Not only is this a staggeringly naïve position to adopt as the leader of the world’s dominant superpower, but it is also an astonishing declaration that the United States is no better than any other nation, and has no right to project its values onto other countries – which is exactly what the US successfully did in Germany and Japan in 1945, Afghanistan in 2001 and Iraq in 2003. It is both a striking abdication of world leadership as well as an egalitarian vision of the world, and one that significantly undermines American global power.

7. Obama believes alliances don’t matter

No American president in modern times has invested less effort in maintaining US alliances than Barack Obama. Whether it is siding with Marxists in Honduras against pro-American forces, condemning Israel, throwing the Poles and Czechs under the bus, or trashing the Anglo-American Special Relationship, the Obama administration has gone out of its way to kick its allies in the teeth while kowtowing to America’s enemies. Great Britain and Israel in particular have borne the brunt of Barack Obama’s disdain, with the leaders of both countries humiliated during visits to the White House. For a president who boasted in his election campaign of restoring America’s “standing” in the world, Obama has done a spectacularly bad job of preserving friendships with Washington’s closest friends.

8. Obama trusts Russia

A central element of President Obama’s nuclear deal with Moscow is the naive belief that Russia can be trusted as a partner of the United States, and that the treaty does not impose restrictions on America’s ability to deploy missile defenses. The Russians in contrast have made it abundantly clear that there is a “legally binding linkage between strategic offensive and strategic defensive weapons.” In other words they expect to have a veto over a US missile defense system. The Obama administration has already bowed to Moscow’s demands to scrap US plans for third site missile defenses in eastern and central Europe, and will no doubt surrender again when Moscow makes further demands. At the same time, there is no sign that Russia will support significantly stronger sanctions against Iran. In effect, Washington has gained nothing at all from its “reset” strategy towards Medvedev and Putin, but merely looks like a soft touch in the eyes of the Kremlin.

9. Obama believes the UN is indispensable

President Obama’s speech before the United Nations General Assembly last September has to rank as the most embarrassing so far of his presidency, cheered to the rafters by an audience that traditionally hates what America stands for. As I wrote at the time, this was a staggeringly naïve speech by President Obama, with Woodstock-style utterances like “I will not waver in my pursuit of peace” or “the interests of peoples and nations are shared.” All that was missing was a conga of hippies dancing through the aisles with a rousing rendition of “Kumbaya”. It was a speech fitting for a president who believes the United Nations is “indispensable” to the United States, and who thinks the UN Human Rights Commission is a force for good. In reality, the UN’s elites dedicate much of their efforts at undermining American power, persecuting Israel, wasting taxpayers’ money, and shielding human rights violators.

10. Obama believes a federal Europe is good for America

The Obama administration has gone to considerable lengths to back the development of a European Union defense identity as well as a European Union foreign policy, both of which will weaken the NATO alliance as well as the broader transatlantic alliance. This is the first US administration to actively back the rise of a federal Europe, and whose key players on European issues actually believe a united Europe is good for the United States. It is an extraordinarily naïve approach which will eventually bite Washington in the back. Even the spectacularly embarrassing appointments of both Herman Van Rompuy and Baroness Ashton as President and High Representative for the European Union have not succeeded in dimming the enthusiasm of the Obama team for the European project.

Leia Mais…