Nog Blogger

Palestine?

2008-11-08T22:27:00.000-08:00

I know it's been more than a month since my last post, but this one had to take a considerable amount of research. Plus I'm lazier than a dying, half-awake sloth.

Many people who don't currently live in caves know of the small region we like to call "Palestine," which is technically Israel. Now, as many of you folks may know, "Palestine" is a little patch of Israel full of Arab squatters--I mean Palestinians--that believe they have the right to control Israel and that the Jews should be permanently expelled. They believe this so strongly they have the irritating tendency to send rockets into Jewish towns and send militants into these towns, where they murder entire families of innocent and defenseless people. Palestinians suffer from the delusion that they are treated as second-class citizens, and of course completely ignore that it is their leaders who are preventing the money from reaching the streets. The Palestinian leaders instead prefer to spend almost every penny they are given to from the UN on weapons and training from Syria, Iran, Egypt, and anywhere else jam-packed with Muslim fanatics.

What many of these people don't know is that they are not victims of Israeli oppression at all. Instead, they are in fact victims of their own neighbors' neglect. When the Arabs intended to destroy Israel shortly after it was created in the late '40s, they ordered the Israeli Muslims to leave the small Jewish Island in that sea of turbans and AK-47s. In return, they were promised the land left behind by the Israelis after they were forced out of the country. Unfortunately for the Arabs, the Israelis had more than half a brain and, with relative ease, forced Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, and Egypt out of its borders. Stumbling around and wondering what the hell had just happened, the Arabs set up refugee camps the size of small cities, blaming the Israelis for their failure and claiming that the Jews had forced the Arabs out of Israel. They conveniently forgot that it was them who had gotten their people to leave so that an entire nation could be destroyed, and that it was the Arabs, not the Jews, who were the sole cause of the Palestinian expulsion from Israel.

My basic point is that the Palestinians and the Arabs in general are the main problem in that section of the Middle East. The Israelis are merely defending themselves: they didn't start the war, although they certainly are trying to end it peacefully and fairly. Think about it, folks.

Guns don't kill people, illegal guns kill people

2008-09-22T21:57:00.000-07:00

Well, folks, after another very long break from blogging, I'm back with another long, well-thought-out rant.

Now, I know the many people who go to my site are probably not Canadian, but I am about to speak on a Canucklehead issue that will someday effect their neighbors further south. Not long ago, in 2005, Prime Minister Paul Martin and his Liberal minions decided that, in order to curb gun violence, they would put a nation-wide ban on handguns in Canada. I'm not sure if this ban simply never materialized or if it was lifted by Stephen Harper, but I do know that it is extremely difficult to get a handgun or rifle in Canada.

The logic of this move escapes me. First of all, do they even think about the people who are committing all the gun crimes? Do they think that some nut-job gangster criminal is just going to waltz into some store and purchase his Colt .45 legally, having done all the paperwork and gone through all the legal documents? No! He gets his gun from arms dealers, other gangsters, and off of the corpses of his victims. Fact of the matter is that a gun ban won't actually stop the violence at all, it'll just make people think they're doing something about a problem they have no hope in hell of solving.

Second off, the gun ban would do far more harm than good. The reason why burglary is such a problem in Canada is because nobody can get a frickin' pistol to defend themselves with! A store owner, a home owner, or anything else can't resist an armed robbery because they haven't got anything to fight back with. So, while Canadians can only call the cops and hope the criminal doesn't get far before they arrive, the American can do this. Unless this madness is stopped, the people will eventually become totally defenseless to defend themselves from criminals and the police will be unable to stop the crime waves. Eventually, this may spread to the United States, violating the constitutional right to bear arms. Think about it, folks.

Made in China

2008-08-14T20:24:00.000-07:00

Well folks, I've been sitting on the fence about a blog on that war in South Ossetia and the Beijing Olympics, and since people seem to care more about some schmuck from Germany getting a gold medal than about some poor kid bombed by MiGs, I decided on the latter.

I was watching a program recently, and it was about the effect of the Olympics on the Chinese population. I gotta tell you, from what I can see, it's just about the worst atrocity committed on the Chinese people since those commie SOBs took power. (At least, the worst one that gets reported to the West). People were forced from their homes so they could build sections of the Olympic stadiums and ceremonial sites and so on that were needed. Civilians were basically told "get out of here or go to prison," were tossed out on the street, and were incapable of complaining to anybody about it because, guess what? In China, you've got no rights! If you complain about losing your house so some guy from the other side of the planet can run for a hundred meters or so, you go to jail! Individuals don't own their homes, the state does, so they get booted out of them for the enjoyment of people everywhere from Canada to Australia (going east, that is).

China has essentially destroyed the Olympics, and here's how. Instead of having real fireworks (which you'd think they'd be well-stocked with since they invented the damn things), they make ones using a computer-those aren't fireworks you're watching, they're binary code made into colorful shapes. And for the kid who sang that stupid little song for the opening ceremony, they made her lip synch, because the kid who actually sang it wasn't cute enough for the part. In essence, the Beijing Olympics is just like everything else made in China: fake and useless.

Now, of the few people who are capable of a tiny amount of independent thought and actually realize what horrible acts are being committed by the Communists on the Chinese, only a few of them realize what should receive blame for what. Liberals in the West will find any imaginable way to desecrate the only working governmental system known-capitalism-and this case is no exception. Instead of getting angry at those repulsive Communist Chinese, they do their best to find reasons to be pissed-off at capitalists. For example, outrage is thrown at McDonald's for advertising the Olympics and using it to get money. But that's not right. All McDonald's is doing is getting profits-there's nothing wrong with that; they need those profits to keep their corporation going. What's wrong with keeping yourself well-fed? The answer is nothing: that's what capitalists do and that's how capitalist countries keep on working long after all other countries fall apart. Think about it, folks.

Screw-up

2008-08-03T16:34:00.000-07:00

Folks, as many of you know, I spend a lot of time on the computer. A LOT of time on the computer. Now, while this may someday result in me having a very large gut and a lonely death by heart attack, for the moment it is working to my advantage. For example, it has allowed me to make these blogs with a certain degree of credibility. As you'll read in this article:
http://www.wtopnews.com/index.php?nid=105&sid=1448629
a Canadian soldier recently killed two children in an Afghani car. The vehicle was driving at high speeds next to his convoy and the driver drove it as if it were going to attack the Canuck soldiers. So, the Canadian opens fire on the vehicle, killing a two-year-old boy and his four-year-old sister, although the driver-their father-was apparently unharmed.

Now, frankly this sounds like a reasonable mistake on the Canadian's part. The driver was driving like an idiot near a military convoy-not a good idea-and the soldier, who had more than likely seen his fair share of Taliban nut-jobs attack convoys with Toyotas, interpreted this as hostile and opened fire. If you ask me, the soldier was just doing his job and, had that actually been a Taliwacker vehicle, he would have saved his own life and the lives of his comrades. Of course, this incident is instantly used as fodder for Liberal and commie scum throughout North America. Immediately after the shooting reached Canadian papers, outrage spreads amongst the anti-war people (despite having the collective intelligence of a single down-syndrome afflicted slug, Liberals are still technically people). Many folks throughout the net, on Youtube, blogging sites, and so on voice their opinions on the matter. Ones that are capable of independent thought understood that it was a simple fuck-up and that no one (except possibly the father, for driving like an idiot) should be blamed.

But, as for those who just think "what would Michael Moore do?" They instantly say that the Canadian soldier is a sick, baby-eating monster and that he should be punished severely. Which is odd, since nobody acts out when this happens. For those of you that didn't follow the link I just gave, what I said was that nobody acts out when innocent children are killed intentionally by the terrorists. I can understand shooting a car driving like that at your convoy in a warzone, but I do not tolerate Taliban sons of bitches blowing themselves up in schools. Strangely enough, liberal dirtbags do tolerate that, because, after all, we invaded Afghanistan and are trying to rebuild it. That gives the enemy the right to murder civilians intentionally, right? WRONG. Any psychotic commie freak that thinks that should get their head checked out.

The fact of the matter is that our soldiers only kill kids by accident. Our enemy kills them intentionally because they use the murdering of children to get them power-they claim that the attacks will stop if we leave. So, who is worse? The people who don't mean to kill children and are here to help a destroyed country, or the people that go around blowing schools and the kids inside and are doing it so they can take control of the country again? Think about it, folks.

Bigotry

2008-07-19T17:44:00.000-07:00

Folks, after yet another long break--this time because of a vacation--I'm back in black and I've got another interesting rant for you. In this case, I will deal with bigotry.

Sure, in the past I have said some...politically incorrect statements, and it is probably true that I suffer from bigotry. Come to think of it, I've said some things that would make a relaxed Muslim/Communist who had never been angry in his life explode with rage. And, frankly, I'm not sorry for saying those things at all. I based my opinions on facts and it's my style to be offensive--it gets my point across better. There is good and bad bigotry: good bigotry is based upon facts and events in the past.

The bigotry I don't appreciate, however, is the kind that not only exists with no reasonable explanation, but the kind that stops one from thinking properly. An example of bad bigotry is the kind most Canadians have towards Americans, and the kind I'm sure most Americans have towards Canucks. Having lived in Canada all my life, I can guarantee you that we have an irrational fear and hate of the United States. People as young as twelve here rant on about how the US is evil and how the US threatened to bomb Canada at various parts in history. Of course, on all accounts these children don't know what they're talking about and they're just basing what they say on a collection of "facts" gathered from Wikipedia and the leftist media.

But bigotry against America is not the worst. There are still people named Billy Ray, whose mother, aunt, cousin, niece and grandmother are all the same person, who are horribly enraged with blacks, Jews, and basically anyone that Hitler didn't appreciate. What is the point? Why can't they just come out of their little shells that they've been hiding in for the last few hundred years? Racism is usually completely baseless or totally exaggerated: people who hate blacks probably think that they were responsible for the Civil War (which is laughable), those who are disgusted with Americans probably think that all they want is oil and global domination (which is just plain stupid), and the folks that hate Jews are the same people that hate blacks and Americans, so they have no credibility and are amusingly brainless. Think about it, folks.

2008-06-29T19:27:00.000-07:00

Well folks, after another irritatingly long break from blogging, I'm back. What can I say? It takes time to find important information on the world today, research it, and then make a lengthy, satisfactory rant on it. As usual, I will blather on about problems created by Commies/Liberals.

In this case, it has to do with something that is common with communists and liberals. Paranoia. When I say paranoia I refer to their irrational fear of the current government (provided that the current government was not the one they voted for). This fear is evidenced by a whole series of sites on the net that say "George Bush did this" or "the government is doing that." One of the biggest ones is the 9/11 conspiracy theory. Now, what these people appear to believe is that the government perpetrated the destruction of the Twin Towers and faked the whole hijacking using some specially trained agents. Before I say anything on this, I recommend you check out this site before moving on:
http://debunking911.com/index.html
As the site will explain in greater detail, the paranoid communist liberals, bitter about the results of the 2000 election, are completely irrational and quite possibly insane...if not utterly braindead. In fact, as explained in this site which was clearly written by a professional, many things the paranoid, delusional commies have ranted about have literally no basis in fact.

For example: it has been said that thermite charges cut through steel, making an exploding noise of some sort as they did so. First of all: thermite DOES NOT MAKE ANY SORT OF BOOM, BANG OR CLANG. There is absolutely no way that anyone more than ten feet away from the thermite could hear it burn sideways, melting a vertical column of metal--which, by the way, is also quite impossible.

These people tell us to "open our eyes" all the time and then, should we question their theories, criticize and make asses out of us for doing so. They don't let us wonder about what is told to us unless we are wondering about what their opponents told us. I guarantee you that if you at first state that you agree with someone who was just explaining how Bush planned 9/11 and so on, he'll say "good for you! You're thinking outside the box!" And then verbally disagree with someone else who also said Bush planned it all, he'll say "you are a narrow-minded fascist pig! How could you not open your eyes and realize that Bush is the evilest bastard on earth!"

This is my response to the latter statement:

"Well, here's how I can't accept that notion. First of all, I've actually done a little thing that you might call a waste of time--research--to base my argument on. Second of all, once obtaining this information, rather than listening to some aging pothead who was a public demonstrator against the Vietnam War in the 70's, I used something you may call absurd. This something is known as logic. After all this, I have determined that Bush didn't actually hold all the cards on Sept. 11, 2001, and that he in fact started the Afghanistan War to do something you are too much of a coward to do: retaliate. "

Of course, as the narrow-minded commie scum was too high on pot at the time to actually understand a word of that, he will brand me a Nazi and say that I am just another drone for Bush. That's how these people actually think. Anyways, I hope you keep an open mind when you think about it, folks.

Weak stomach

2008-06-15T19:17:00.000-07:00

The United States is a great, powerful nation in many ways. Its military is massive and well-equipped, it is the most technologically advanced country in the world, and it has a vast wealth of natural resources. In many ways it would be invincible to any attack from a hostile nation. But it does have one major problem: a weak stomach and therefore a lack of respect.

What do I mean? According to an article (http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2008/01/airforce_china_strategy_080121/)
The Americans get very little respect. Here's why: as the article explains, the Chinese say the U.S has a public that is "abnormally sensitive about military casualties." In their eyes the American public is so afraid of troop deaths that any large casualty numbers would result in a massive anti-war movement. The American public is terrified of losing its men and women. But the Communists? You could kill a few million of 'em and they would neither notice nor care -- they'd just get angry. While the Americans start burning their own nation's flag and insult the President when they attack a bad guy, the Chinese cheer and wave Red flags when their tanks roll into somebody else's country.

No wonder Muslim extremists think they can win in the Middle East. They know, just as the Chinese do, that the United States is too enfeebled to fight a prolonged and costly war. On the other hand, the terrorists and the communists are tough. They don't care how many perish: as long as they win in the end, the losses don't matter. This percolates through from the government or terrorist group down to the average Chinese, Afghani, or Iraqi civilian. It's the same thing for all totalitarian nations: the Soviet Union lost eleven million people in World War II, and yet it glorified the war as much as possible over the next forty-six years. Despite losing hundreds of thousands of men for just fifty-thousand Americans, the North Vietnamese persevered throughout the Vietnam War. On the Muslim side of things, many actually glorify death. If you're a one of these and are killed in war, you are a martyr and are venerated. Maybe that's why they fought so hard through the Soviet War in Afghanistan, and maybe that's why neither Iraq nor Iran admitted defeat in the 1980-1988 war.

If the American public had a stronger stomach, the country would be feared and respected. Unfortunately, it is scared shitless of losing its citizens in battle. For that reason, America will always be disrespected by its foes. Think about it, folks.

An update

2008-06-11T21:06:00.001-07:00

Well, folks, I've got an update on the whole global warming situation. I know I've been explaining how the sun is the main influence on this whole "global warming" thing. But here's information taken straight from

http://www.spaceweather.com/

Which is probably considered a more reliable source than my ranting. This site will show you that there has not been one major sunspot or collection of sunspots for more than a month. The sun is largely inactive, and the few sunspots it has given off are from the previous cycle. Interestingly enough, the earth has recently undergone a period where it is colder and weather is less wild. In order to defend themselves, the global warming people have of course "predicted" that the weather will be cooler and there will be fewer hurricanes than in past years for the next year or so, and that this is because of humans. Once again, the environmentalists are trying to cover their asses and they're not doing it very well. As always, they try to bend their theories to fit the current situation. If the sun decides it's time to have some major sunspots and solar flares, things will heat up back on earth and once more the environmentalists will say that it's because of human activity. So you see, no matter what happens, the global warming people will always say that the humans are the cause of the temperature of the earth. According to them, before we were around, the earth's temperature never decreased or increased. Think about it, folks.

Damn, man, you crazy!

2008-05-27T19:44:00.000-07:00

Well folks, it's been almost two weeks since my last post, but I'm finally back. Here's one that I've given some real thought to-something that will be worth the wait.

Now, according to the general public, an insane man is, to put it loosely, someone who thinks about weird things. An insane fellow would be a guy who says the world's going to end tomorrow, aliens implanted chips in my brain, or The Weekly World News isn't funny-it's true. Now, all three of those things are things that only a complete madman would say, correct? However, at least in the case of the first two, are they not things that a creative man would say? Wouldn't a story where a man had chips implanted in his brain by aliens make a pretty good movie? My real question is; what is the difference between insanity and creativity? Where do you draw the line? In fact, many people that were considered insane in their time were actually quite sane and clear-thinking. Einstein, Nikola Tesla, hell, even Edvard Munch makes sense to some people.

But the problem with people is that most have the same view of everything. Almost everyone tries to think the same way as everybody else does-that way, they don't have people look at them strangely and call them nuts. We all do have strange thoughts once in a while-sometimes they suddenly pop up while we sleep, waking us up at four in the morning, while other times they appear when we're at work. But most people just ignore them-one night you wake up thinking about a solution to some major problem, but you forget it because it sounds crazy. Our mind is much like the sun-it's a huge bubbling mass, and every so often it shoots up a huge column of flames; AKA a thought. Many times this thought means nothing-a three headed cat, for example, and we forget about it for good reason. When an actually good thought pops up, we often forget it, too, because we think that it would make us look like we've lost our mind.

But the "insane" man doesn't just forget about what he thinks of. When that column of fire shoots out of his bubbling brain he holds on to it, pondering the effects of this new thought. Unfortunately, sometimes when someone actually has a severe mental disorder they hold onto the wrong thoughts. But there are those who cannot be proven to be insane who are labeled crazy anyways-not by a doctor but by their peers. And so the person who thought of something to solve world hunger forgets about his, as it turns out, logical and practical idea to avoid being ridiculed. Because of this, because of those who want you to think inside the box, many good thoughts are discarded. Think outside the box when you think about it, folks.

The new religion

2008-05-14T19:41:00.000-07:00

Religion, according to Websters (hey, do I sound like the kinda guy who can find a frickin' Oxford?), is the service or worship of god or the supernatural. Religion does not use reason or science to support its arguments of god or the supernatural-and if you deny that there is a god or the supernatural being of any sort, you go to a bad place. Now, frankly, I don't have a problem with religion or religious folk. Your beliefs are not my concern in that area.

But what I do fret over is that more and more people are accepting a very specific religion as being complete, undeniable fact. This religion is called environmentalism. The specific part of it that is growing is global warmingism. If you even think that global warming either doesn't exist or that it's not caused by people, even if you mention it for a moment to a global warmingist, you are immediately labeled as a right-wing fascist son of a bitch. That's right, folks. You are a right-wing fascist son of a bitch if you try to say that global warming might-might-be either natural or nonexistent. Even if you use reason, such as pointing out that the northern ice shelves are increasing in size and that the earth is getting increasingly cold. The response? Either you're part of the Nazi Party and you're an S.O.B, or you'll get the following:
"Well, the global warming is just being covered up by the natural cycle."
They will go on to explain that global warming does exist, but that the earth gets colder for periods of time, covering up the GW.

Now, here's my personal problem with that. Other than the obvious possibility that, hey, maybe global warming is actually just part of the normal cycle, doesn't this sound like something someone worshiping a god (global warming) would say to defend his religion (environmentalism)? It does. It's a pathetic, last-ditch attempt for the environmentalists to defend their feebly-built and rapidly deteriorating argument. The same thing is done by the Christian fundamentalists when you try to tell them that the earth actually is older than 6000 years. They say,
"Nope. All your science is wrong; all of the carbon dating is bullshit."
Yep, that's right, folks. Because of a very long, somewhat entertaining, book, everything you try and say to tell them that they're wrong is deflected by two words. The Bible. Only, in this case, the bible is called "The Inconvenient Truth," and the writer was a fat liberal swine who doesn't know his ass from his elbow. Environmentalism is a religion, one that is defended by ridiculously poor, half-assed arguments and one that is very dangerous to civilization as we know it. Think about it, folks.

The wild, wild internet

2008-05-11T15:25:00.001-07:00

Well, I've been gone for some time now, but finally I'm back with a whole new rant. This time on what goes on in the world of the nerd and fatass: the internet

The internet has often been called a new frontier, unexplored and lawless. I agree with this fully: the kind of things you find on the net can easily be something that you have never imagined, or something that you would block from your mind if you ever did imagine it. There is also little law on the web: sure, every so often you hear about some disgusting scumbag getting caught putting kiddie porn on the web and spending the next few years of his life as a prison bride, but it is still virtually impossible to control the people that populate the internet. On this net you have perverts, murderers, psychos with bizarre beliefs, and people that rant on about stuff you don't care about, and there is no way to track them all down. The internet is not traceable, it is easily accessible, and it's growing.

Think about the kind of people that use the internet to their advantage, folks. Some are like me: they just want to state their opinions. Others are good people who want to educate, and some are entrepreneurs who are trying to make a profit. Then you have con artists and nut jobs, who use the internet to get money illegally or for other, far more horrible purposes. But then there's a third class of evil people on the net: people who spread propaganda. Muslims go on Youtube and MySpace to show off recently-beheaded American soldiers, while communists lie about capitalism and the Russians...well basically they go out and do the typical Russian thing by showing off their low-quality military. In one way, these people make me sick, and I do my best to fight them. In another way, however, they show that the world is a free place where anyone can say anything, advertising their beliefs. So the internet is a horrible place in some ways and in another way it is a wondrous place that tells you that no matter what country you're in, as long as you have a computer and a wireless internet, you still have the right of free speech. Think about it, folks.

Another break from politics

2008-04-30T20:27:00.000-07:00

I'm not that much of a car guy, but there are some pretty damn big problems with today's average vehicles, folks.

First problem: they're toys. Most cars today have more plastic in them than metal and glass combined, for reasons that I can't understand. Now, sure, plastic looks nice and it don't rust, but if ya ask me, it's a huge design flaw. Because with steel if you get into an accident, your car's dented but it's still roadworthy enough to drive to the repair shop. But let's say you're driving a rice-rocket and you smash into an SUV. Here's what happens: the rice-rocket is completely destroyed. The plastic bends and snaps and the engine gets totaled. Never again will you drive that car, because it's so badly damaged that when you touch it, the doors all fall off. And since it's so compact, when the airbag shoots out it either gives you whiplash or just kills you outright. Metal is tough, plastic is flexible. Which do you want, folks? A strong metal frame that any Jap-crap car will bounce off of, or a weak plastic covering that will mush and quite possibly kill you-but without any of that ugly rusting.

Second problem: they all look the same. Every single car being pumped out these days-except for the really, REALLY expensive ones, look exactly alike in every way. They're all the same buglike, compact, unsafe piles of crap. Driving down the street you can see that one in every twenty cars is unique-the other nineteen are practically indistinguishable, other than, perhaps, their length or their height. Is it just me, or is this a bad idea? I mean, the unique cars are probably going to sell better than the other cars, aren't they? So why not just make each and every car model different in some visible way? Some people can recognize individual cars from the 1960's and 1970's despite the vehicles not being manufactured more than a year apart and being manufactured by the same company. But no one can tell a 1999 PT Cruiser from a 2007 model, now can they?

Third problem: they're too damn complicated. Once-you may find it hard to believe-there was a time when you did not need a PhD in Engineering and Computer Programming to know how to fix a car. As strange as it may sound, if you had engine trouble, all you needed was a toolbox with a ratchet, a few screwdrivers of varying types and sizes, and some wrenches. If you've got a bad carburetor, you either buy a new one or find a matching one somewhere and screw it onto your engine. Next thing you know, your car's working fine and you're cruisin' down the highway.

Nowadays, on the other hand, if the complicated computer that runs your fuel-injected engine has a minor problem, you need to find a way to take it to the car repair shop and have it completely dismantled and put together again. Spending $5000 on this, you then get on the road again only to find that it has another problem, this time not with the computer but with, let's say, the fuel pump. This fuel pump is so well hidden that once more you go to the car repair shop and spend another $5000 dollars on fixing it. Tell me, which of the following cars is superior: the 1964 Impala, or the 2008 Kia? Think about it, folks.

Even more liberal stupidity

2008-04-23T20:07:00.000-07:00

More liberal stupidity is botherin' me, folks. Here's the horses**t that they've been spewing for a few years now. Apparently, the war in Iraq is totally illegal and is only being done for the oil and the control of the Persian Gulf.

Alright, here's the first thing I don't like about that statement. I suppose that the war is illegal from the UN's screwy perspective, which is under the impression that no westernized nation is allowed to win a war. Okay, so according to them, the War in Iraq is illegal because it wasn't really provoked the way most would expect it to be. I suppose if we had just waited for Iraq and Iran to set up a coalition with the rest of the Muslim world, destroy Israel and start attacking any non-Muslim country in existence and bring about the deaths of a few million people, then the war in Iraq would be perfectly reasonable. Of course, as George W. Bush has more than two brain cells to rub together, he probably did not want that to happen. So, he instead attacked Iraq and risked losing public support. Now the Muslim threat has been significantly reduced, although we're going to need to stay there until Iran is no longer a problem.

As for the second thing I don't like about that statement, I honestly see no problem with the U.S waging a war for oil. I cannot see a single thing wrong with the United States getting control of the towelhead-I mean Arab-oil. Who would you rather have the oil-the crazy ragheads who will use it to get enough profits to fund the genocide of Kurds and Jews, or the people who honestly couldn't give a damn about someone else's religion or nationality and just want to live good lives. I suppose if we had let Saddam Hussein live and keep control over the oil and use it to pay off all his debts from the Iran-Iraq War and the Gulf War nothing bad would have happened to us. Nothing bad, that is, until Hussein keeled over, the Iranians conquered the country in a matter of days while the government was still in disarray as it tried to find a successor, and attacked Israel. Nothing bad would have happened until the Iranians, Iraqis and all the other overly religious towelheads in the Middle East decided that they were now not all that weak.

Nothing bad would have happened at all until the Middle East annihilated Israel and started to massacre any non-Muslim man, woman or child. If you ask me-which I know you didn't-the war in Iraq was the single most brilliant preemptive strike ever performed. Think about it, folks.

Reincarnation

2008-04-15T19:25:00.000-07:00

Reincarnation. Some say it is the truth, others say it is...well, others say it is what comes out of a Bull's behind. Me? I'm open to the idea, sure. But the existence of reincarnation is not what I'm about to rant on.

Instead, here's the thing. Everyone who says they've been reincarnated claims two things that I think come from the behind of a male cow. First of all, everyone who's been reincarnated used to be someone in the past. This means that every previous life you had happened a long time ago-for example, General George S. Patton claimed to be the reincarnation of one of Napoleon's greatest field marshals. Now, okay, I can understand why a previous life can be in the past. But why can't it be in the future? Since reincarnation is basically a form of time travel, why does it have to go back but not forwards? Who knows, maybe in a previous life Patton was Emperor Zargon of the Glarbonians in the fourth millennium. If it goes backwards then it should damn well be able to go forwards, too. Think about that one, folks.

But here's the second thing that comes right outta the bulls ass. Everyone who has been reincarnated was, in a previous life, a household name. Everybody has to be someone famous or infamous-somebody says that he used to be Ramses II, while somebody else says that she used to be Cleopatra. Apparently, only great people can be reincarnated. Everyone else: to hell with ya!

But it's not a matter of people actually being reincarnated from somebody great, it's a matter of them thinking that they've been reincarnated from somebody great. You weren't Cleopatra, ya nimrod! You were her dog, or her foot-rubber. If reincarnation actually exists, then the vast majority of people who've been reincarnated are actually the reincarnation of someone who history has long since forgotten. Anyone who says they're the reincarnation of someone great is more than likely fulla crap. Personally, I think I was once a very lazy cat that pawed the typewriter every week or so. It sure fits my personality and favorite activity.

At any rate, think about it, folks.

News

2008-04-10T14:43:00.001-07:00

You're watchin' T.V, folks. You're watching the news, waiting for the story about how nine people were murdered by a seemingly random serial killer in your very neighborhood. But first, you have to wait for the story about a kitten that got stuck in a tree for three hours to finish first.
"And the little kitty stayed up there for three hours. Poor widdle kitty. In other news, a few people were murdered today. Moving on to the story about a riot that almost occurred twenty years ago..."
You're sitting there, perhaps your mouth his hanging open. Nine people are dead, and nobody seems to care. If they do lengthen the story at all, it will actually tell you nothing important. Pay close attention to the news: when somebody gets murdered, the news people either don't know jack about the suspects, or they don't think that's necessary. But, they do know that the families are very sad and that the killer could be anywhere. So they exploit it: if you watch the news,
you'll see that there is a lot of crap about how sad the families are, showing some poor kids' mother cry, rather than telling you to look for the prime suspect. Sure, some television shows will give you the details on the prime suspect and will tell you to phone the cops if you find him. Unfortunately, they will only tell you these important details about ten years after the victim died and not on a news show. It's helpful to have shows like America's Most Wanted, but they only very rarely give us useful information quickly enough.

My point is that the news stations, quite simply, suck. They never tell you anything that you will actually need to know. So far, the only station that will ever give you anything that might be useful on a regular basis is that BBC news channel. Unfortunately, all of the stories involve world politics-which may be interesting and a good thing to know, but they don't tell you about what's going on in your city. You wanna know about that serial killer who just massacred nine people? Here's the gist of the response you'll get from the news people: Too bad, asshole, we don't want to tell you anything important 'til after he kills ya! Think about it, folks.

Humans: a race of know-it-alls

2008-04-04T19:44:00.000-07:00

Ya know folks, we humans are a buncha fat, pompous pigs. I mean, really, we honestly do think that we are the most intelligent people in the universe. We think that we are the center of the universe.

What do I mean? Let's take the human genome as an example. When we mapped it out, we could only find out what a tiny percentage of it actually did. Something like 10%. The other 90%, according to self-proclaimed "experts", is completely meaningless. That's right, folks, just because we can't figure out what it is, it obviously doesn't mean anything. We believe that we are so intelligent and so superior, that we actually have the nerve to say that anything we can't explain the purpose of does not have any purpose. Now let's try dark matter as another example. Scientists, presumably astronomers but usually referred to in the media as scientists, claim that there are vast pockets of dark matter. They don't know the properties of this matter, but they're certain that they are all the same and are definitely not just pockets of stuff that we can't see. Dark matter my ass! It's called a crappy telescope. Get a better one.

But we humans are pompous in other, more subtler ways. You see, we use a twisted form of logic that can be understood by anyone. This logic is that all races in the universe must exist only on worlds that are exactly the same as earth-that's what people are saying now. Sure, I can understand looking for planets like earth because, after all, if life formed here, it must be able to form under the same conditions elsewhere. But the real problem is that we are now saying that the only way life can form is under the exact same conditions that happened here on earth a few billion years ago. That's right, folks. The only way life can exist is if there's the highly volatile oxygen gas, the not very common water, and a medium distance from the sun.

What's the problem with that, you might ask? Here's the problem: what about all the other chemicals and gasses? What makes oxygen and water so special? Frankly, I wouldn't be too surprised if life formed on a planet with an atmosphere of hydrogen and helium, like Jupiter. I can see life forming there-life that's very resistant to radiation, but it's still possible. In fact, life has formed in highly radioactive conditions. They've actually found life forming in nuclear reactors-and I'm talking about the most radioactive parts of the reactors. If life can form there, than obviously earth-like conditions are not the only possible way to have life-forms.

My point is that we humans are not that special. We can say that we know everything, but if you think about it, up until Einstein came around we thought we had it all figured out. Then he came and pooped everybody's party. Why? Because we did not have it right, even if we believed we did so much. Come to think of it, in another hundred years we could have a completely different view on everything around us. We don't know everything and we should never assume that we do. Think about it, folks.

A break from the typical political ranting

2008-03-31T14:41:00.000-07:00

Alright, folks, I'm runnin' out of politically incorrect rants for the moment, but don't worry, I can still rant.

Let's say an alien comes from a planet with an atmosphere of sulpher, lakes of liquid methane, and with a generally unearthly landscape. He has one huge eye on the top of his gigantic, spherical body, with tentacles and spikes jutting out of every square inch of his protective shell. When he is born, his hyper-advanced species downloads all the information we humans wouldn't be able to learn in our entire lifetimes directly into his huge brain. This allows him to immediately begin exploring the galaxy without having to spend years of training to do so.

Now, this alien arrives at our planet in a flying saucer, remaining inside his vehicle and monitoring our people from orbit. The first thing he notices is our huge cities, which he somewhat recognizes, as all of his homeworld except for the most impassable mountain ranges is covered with a city. But, when monitoring the people living in the homes, he finds several disturbing images.

Let's say he's looking into the lives of a dysfunctional family in a trailer park. Fifteen people, only two of them more than two years old (the parents), sleep in a single room in a poorly-made trailer, eat food made in the most unsanitary kitchen imaginable, and entertain themselves by drinking alcohol and watching a tiny television. Usually, the apparent alpha dog of this family, which the alien assumes is a normal family for the humans, AKA the father, drinks about two bottles of what we call Jack Daniels in a day and beats the living hell out of his wife and kids. After this the alien, who has never slept a day in his life as his species does not require rest, sees the family lie down on their strange, soft pad. For the next eight to twelve hours they remain unconscious, before finally waking, at which point they begin to repeat what they did the previous day. The mother works at a small building, cooking food for a very low wage, while the father and kids sit around the house and watch their tiny television.

The alien decides not to make first contact with these people, believing they are dangerous. He proceeds to destroy the earth with a laser beam, ending the lives of six billion people without any warning.

Think about it, folks.

Political correctness (AKA: Political football)

2008-03-26T09:51:00.000-07:00

There are many wrong things most believe are right in this world. Global Warming, communism, Kosovo, Family Guy, and numerous others. And to tell ya the truth, folks, I don't mind those ones as much as most because they're not accepted widely-they're just a minor inconvenience that I like to rant about.

But then there are things that are widely believed to be right when they are one of the wrongest things imaginable. What am I prattling on about? In this case, censorship. Political correctness. Nowadays you can get sued for making a joke about women, tossed in jail for calling somebody fat, and get your ass blown up for insulting Islam. The problem with censorship is that not only does it limit our freedoms, taking away our rights, but it also is terrorism that we follow with glee. We can't say that Islam is the ridiculous, evil cult that it is on television because the television corporations are afraid of getting hit with suicide bombers. That is the terrorists prevailing right there: they have already taken away our right of free speech-now they're working on the right to worship and to vote. We let them win by blocking anyone that even attempts to make eve the slightest crack at them, probably all because some Danish man depicted Muhammad.

But its not just the ragheads that we have to worry about anymore. Now everybody wants to censor everything: feminists are calling men chauvinist pigs because they make the slightest little sexist comment. At the same time, others are trying to steal the right to say "nigger" because it's considered very racist. Of course, any black man can say it because then its not a curse, it's just something he says to his friends, or his kids, or his own goddamn grand parents. But if whitey says it, then it's off with his head (metaphorically speaking).

Despite this, television becomes more depraved and insane. On one hand, we can't say nigger or call blond women dumb, on the other hand, we are fine with the average commercial showing soft-core porn and a talking, martini-drinking dog. Now, personally, I like the former half of that statement, and I don't think it should change, but I should be able to say whatever I want on television. If I want to call Islam a cult based on the insane ramblings of some pedophile named Muhammad, then I should be able to do so on any media. It's not just a way of keeping our rights, it's a way of fighting terrorism. Think about it, folks.

Whoops!

2008-03-20T10:32:00.000-07:00

Sorry, folks, in the last post I said

"They let the atrocities of the enemy overshadow the occasional minor mistake of the U.S soldier"

What I meant was

"They let the occasional minor mistake of the U.S soldier overshadow the atrocities of the enemy."

Sorry for any confusion that caused, folks.

More Liberal Stupidity

2008-03-20T10:00:00.000-07:00

Sorry for the few days I spent away from the blog, folks. But, for every few days I spend away from the blog, there's several amazing minutes of ranting and raving to read.

Ya know what's a real problem in this world? When the time comes for war, we let the enemy gain support and our own side lose it. Take the Iraq War for example: I don't see anyone outside the White House complaining about how some Raghead blows himself up at a restaurant, killing forty civilians and wounding fifty. But if an American soldier accidentally shoots a civilian because he could have been with the Mujahideen? In minutes the president's getting his head bitten off by commie, terrorist-supporting Liberals who think that every person who carries an M16 instead of an AK-47 came straight from hell. These people make me sick. They let the atrocities of the enemy overshadow the occasional minor mistake made by our troops-and they also make disgusting, often completely nonsensical claims. For example, many Liberals tend to say that the war in Iraq is for oil. They continue to claim this despite the fact that the U.S government could not possibly hope to gain more than it spends on the conflict.

These Liberals think that everyone fighting against the ragheads are evil. Israel, for example, is criticized horribly because it attempts to take out the rocket launchers that fire randomly at Israeli towns. The Liberals appear to believe that the ragheads are heroic warriors fighting for freedom-that's not what they're fighting for, damn it! They want control. Why else would the Taliban still be fighting a guerrilla war despite having lost all hope of winning? The ragheads have nothing on their mind other than control. It's all they think about: the Taliban want Afghanistan back, and will continue trying to get it back until they're all dead. They want to control the earth, and in order to do that they feel that they need to control the Middle East first. They will not stop until they die, because the only thing that a terrorist thinks about is control. All Akbar wants is to exercise total control over his people. Take pre-2001 Afghanistan as an example: in order to control the people, essentially all forms of media were banned. While women were beaten for not completely covering their bodies, the men and children were deprived of going to the movies or enjoying themselves. The leaders did this solely for control and nothing else; they don't care for their people because if they do what the people want, they will not be exercising complete control.

These Liberals are either evil or stupid, depending on who it is. Michael Moore: we can tell he is stupid because he felt that the ragheads would win the Second Battle of Fallujah, which the ragheads lost terribly thanks to their being totally disorganized. Others can be determined to be evil: anyone that shouts out "Death to Israel" is probably not like the fat, cowardly Moore. He is instead evil, wanting only the death of the Jews and the control of their country. Think about it, folks.

T.V sucks...usually

2008-03-14T22:52:00.000-07:00

Family Guy, the Simpsons, and about a hundred other television shows that are exactly the same are an excellent topic for a rant.

There are very few types of T.V shows nowadays. First, you've got the disgusting crime dramas (eg. C.S.I), all of which consist of a zillion episodes thanks to their huge ratings-and not one unique episode thanks to crappy writers. These shows are all exactly the same: a guy or girl-usually a girl, and usually a particularly beautiful one at that-is found brutally murdered. All of the main characters are completely stoic when they first see the body, usually opening up with an amazingly, mind-numbingly stupid line intended to be clever based on the way the guy was killed or the place they were in when being killed. Following this is a lengthy investigation involving the corpses getting dissected in very dark morgues, completely impossible and disgusting situations like finding sperm inside the eye socket of the largely eaten victim, and with plenty of stupid and unrealistic drama. Finally, they find the killer, fill in all the plot holes in a matter of minutes, and get the criminal to confess easily. Seeing that kinda crap once is enough for me-I don't want to watch six or seven seasons of it.

Second of all, we've got the comedy cartoons/sitcoms. Sitcoms and cartoons are now exactly the same: fatass, middle-aged dad is caring for 2-8 kids, every day going through "wacky" situations. Wacky in this case can mean anything from the fatass dads' daughter thinking she's pregnant before she finds out just before getting married to her boyfriend that she's not pregnant (Family Guy) to amazingly mundane situations, such as the light-bulb going out or a bird setting up a nest on the house (any sitcom). At first, these shows start out pretty good and funny (The Simpsons), and for several seasons they are good and funny. But then they start to become less funny and more "wacky," or in other words, less good and more moronic. Eventually, it goes from moronic to psychotic. Family Guy started off moronic before going psychotic, so it did not really get much worse since its beginning. But the Simpsons, on the other hand, has gone from one of the funniest shows ever made, to one of the stupidest, to among the top most bizarre. And one last thing about these poor excuses of comedy is that they always end with some childish lesson that the characters always learn.
"You know, Bill, I've learned something today. When you cross the street, you really do have to look both ways."
Really? I did not know that. A show rated 18A is teaching me something. Wow. I didn't watch this show to learn, goddamn it, I watched it to see profanity and nudity!
That's why I like Trailer Park Boys: they never learn anything and their adventures are not completely moronic/psychotic.

Finally, we have reality T.V. Look, first of all, if it's on T.V, it should not involve "Reality" unless it's the frickin' news or if its on that Spike channel. They call Survivor a reality show because, supposedly, the people have to survive being on an island for several weeks. Yeah, that's right, they're gonna send some hot chicks and dumb guys to a random island in the middle of the South Pacific Ocean and leave them for a week or so. It's just stupid: anyone who thinks that's real should get their head checked out. It's a studio with a pool made to look like a beach. It's that simple-there is no way they would leave those people out there, because if they did, they would come back to find all of them getting eaten by sharks.

There are many other classes of T.V shows I could complain about, but because this is my longest rant yet, I think I should rap it up. There are very few good shows nowadays-these ones being, in my opinion, Trailer Park Boys, Disorderly Conduct: Video on Patrol, and a few of those shows that take place in the future and in space. Everything else needs a lot of improvement. Think about it, folks.

Back to dah blog

2008-03-12T14:35:00.001-07:00

Alright, folks, after a long break from blogging, I'm back. And I got a brand-new rant for ya.

There is a major problem with the North American and Western European countries, as well as with the Scandinavian nations. This problem is with our prisons. To elaborate, our prisons are too nice-we do not deal with criminals with the proper fashion. For example, murderers, even child-killers, have rights when they are tossed in jail. Now, thieves and drug dealers aren't that bad; they're just trying to make a living, and so they don't necessarily need to be punished brutally, that I admit. But some fifty-five year old son of a bitch that rapes and murders a sixteen-year old girl? As soon as he's convicted he should be executed-no life sentences, no sympathy, and absolutely no rights while he's in jail. The justice system should not be a punishment; it needs to be a way of removing threats from the population. Of course, a thief and a drug dealer, or even someone who accidentally runs over somebody should be punished but not permanently removed.

But most justice systems don't see it this way: if you kill your own spouse in Canada, the worst you'll get is 25 years without parole. Usually, however, you'll get parole and it won't be 25 years: it will probably be closer to ten or fifteen years.

But let's go to China. In China, do you know what happens to some bastard who decides he doesn't like his nextdoor neighbor and expresses himself with an ax or a pistol? They hang him! He's also killed in public.

An even better system of execution can be found in the Muslim countries of the Middle East. You want to murder someone? Say hello to Mr. Guillotine. These people are also dealt with in public and are never again a threat to the general population.

But the problem with these countries is that their justice systems cannot track down the bad guys well enough because either, in the case of China, it's too easy to disappear into the massive population, or, in the case of the raghead countries, they just don't have the technology to find them or prove that they were the killers. But if the West combined these brutal and effective methods of taking down the worst criminals with our ability to convict them, then the problems with crime in our countries would disappear totally. Think about it, folks.

Obesity? What's that? Oh, you mean lard-bags!

2008-03-04T18:24:00.000-08:00

Okay, folks, I gotta say something to anyone that's obese. You say that you're unable to help it, that you were born obese and that there's nothing you can do about it because it's in your genes. According to obese people, either they're "big boned" or have a "wide girth." That's a load of horses**t! Of course, you must be big boned in order for your bones to hold that much lard, and yes, I suppose you do have a wide girth, but I would be more inclined to call it a fat ass. There are people out there who try and fight obesity, who try and help kids who are fat by sending them to fat camps or by humiliating them on television. That's not how you do it. Here's how ya do it: let's say Big Timmy is eating too much, and becomes fat. First of all, you do not call him big boned or use any sort of euphemism to describe him-either he's just plain fat or he's lardo. Either way, if you refer to him like this, provided that he has any willpower at all he will take at least some measure to correct his weight. But, of course, no kid has that much willpower. So, here's the second thing you do: take the burger full of four beef patties out of his hand and replace it with a ham and lettuce sandwich. It's gonna take a lotta ham and lettuce sandwiches for him to keep that fat-too many for him to eat, so eventually the guy's weight will go down.

But the real problem with these people is the fact that they think they're blameless. Anyone who thinks that they have no say in what's happening to them should be smacked upside the head with something heavy and blunt. Sure, there are some things you really can't do anything about-cancer just happens to some people, even if they've never smoked or done anything unhealthy in their lives. But obesity is not a cancer. Obesity, and by that I mean fatness, is something that people do to themselves-unless, of course, you're saying that eating a half a ton of ice cream and McDonald's every day of your life will have no effect on your weight. You see, research has shown that there are genes which cause people to be overweight. Alright, fine, there's no problem with that, sometimes they can't help it but be a little big. But weighing 400 pounds and being incapable of moving? No gene does that to you-only you do that to you. The fact of the matter is that these people have curable eating disorders. How do you cure them? Lock them up with other vats 'o fat. Just keep them locked up in a controlled environment and feed them three meals a day with nothing but very healthy food. Michael Moore looks like Michael Jackson with a fuzzy orange beard when he leaves.

Nobody should think that they are blameless for their weight. If you weigh more than 50% of the average weight for someone your age and height, then obviously you need to put down the frickin' cheeseburger and start doing some push-ups. Like I said, your genes might make you a little overweight, and that's okay. But if you weigh too much to get out of bed, then there's obviously a little more than some microscopic strands of DNA at fault. Think about it, folks.

Another day, another rant

2008-03-03T10:19:00.000-08:00

Here's something I just gotta rant about, folks. Cyber-terrorists. Have you ever seen these guys? Go look up something-anything-to do with the Iraq War or America on, let's say Youtube, and you'll come up with some of the most despicable lies I've ever seen. For example, this one fellow made a video babbling on about the "American Empire" and how horrible the United States is, stating facts about percentage of obesity and illiteracy. The guy's from Russia, and he's saying that the U.S.A is a bad country based on some facts he got straight from Wikipedia. He's from Russia! He completely ignores the fact that Russia is a dying nation, with its people often not being able to educate themselves and with the percentage of illiterate people being disturbingly high. You think the U.S is a bad country? At least they don't have half the population addicted to Vodka, and the other half being too old to have children. Sure, the Americans tend to be addicted to burgers, but hey! There's still going to be an America in a hundred years. Russia? I'm not so sure.

But it's not only those supposedly no longer communist Reds that are causing trouble. Let's look over to the Muslims, or, more specifically, the very few Iraqis that have computers. One of them made an entire video about destroyed tanks, all of which he claimed were American. First of all, if they were American tanks, then what was the Syrian flag doing on half of them, and why were they in black and white pictures that appear to be from the Six Day and Yom Kippur Wars? Oh, yeah, that's right, it was because not one of them was an American tank, old or modern, and they were all the ones that the Israelis destroyed in droves!

It really sickens me to see these terrorist scumbags. Some claim that the United States will be destroyed by Islam in a few years. Right, that makes sense: a few guys hiding in rat-infested spider-holes in the middle of Iraq with RPGs are going to destroy the most industrialized country-with the best army by the way-on the entire planet. Do you know what their reasoning for this ridiculous belief is? Supposedly, their twisted version of god is going to give them some sort of a miracle that they can use to murder men, women and children. I gotta tell you, it's going to take a lotta praying for god to salvage your mission after its gone this wrong. But Akbar Shiite-hed continues to go everywhere, from the internet to some poor village in Iraq or Afghanistan, keeping up the false hope that he will not be blown into a fine red paste by an American tank or fighter-bomber. Support our troops so Akbar gets taught a lesson he won't soon forget. Think about it, folks.

Liberal stupidity

2008-03-02T10:02:00.001-08:00

I hate to be overly political (well, not really, seeing as this entire blog is based on my scientific and political views), folks, but I think there's a major flaw with Climate Change.

According to David Suzuki and his life partner Al Gore, the release of carbon dioxide emissions into the air causes the Greenhouse Effect. Now, that's not where the flaw is-the flaw is that they say that this will somehow bring about the destruction and death of the earth. Am I missing something rather large here? Is it just me, or does that not make any sense? How will the world end if the earth gets a few degrees warmer? I don't see the reason in this. Even if the ice caps did melt and flood major cities and such, there would still be no severe problems that would destroy the earth. Come to think of it, conditions for life would improve. For example: all those starving kids in Ethiopia? Not starvin' no more because Ethiopia is rich thanks to a massive fishing industry and a beautiful climate that attracts tourism, with its enemy Eritrea being totally flooded, ending the wars between the two countries.

But this is not the only problem with Climate Change. Another major flaw in reasoning is that humans are the cause of it. According to Al Gore, Suzuki and other people who claim to be scientists but actually know nothing of the world around them, that rather large ball of burning Hydrogen and Helium-the one eight light minutes away-has nothing to do with the earth's temperature. I suppose I can see that-the reasoning for the Global Warmians being that the sun only effects the earth's temperature slightly. Or at least I would be able to see that if it weren't for the fact that for the past 4.5 billion years the global temperature has been going hand-in-hand with the sun's activity. If you look at a graph of the sun's activity since 1900 and the earth's temperature? Big surprise: the two graphs practically mirror each other. Interestingly enough, for about as long as the Global Warmists have been babbling nonsensically, the sun's activity has been unusually high. Sunspots and solar flares and such were very common-when the sun was warmer, the earth was warmer. But now the activity of the sun is starting to go down. So is the warmists' argument. In most of Israel it was snowing for several days straight just a month or so ago, while Tehran is facing record cold temperatures. Does this not seem odd to you? But if you're still not convinced, how about we go to Eastern Canada, where most of the global warming bulls**t came from. For the past several weeks it has been colder than it has been in many years, with thick ice and snow covering the landscape. Seems mighty odd for a planet that's doomed by warming, don't it? A little while ago people were worried about the ice shelf to the north of Canada-the Liberal Warmists were complaining that if we didn't cut back on greenhouse gas emissions, the ice would disappear entirely. Now they ignore it-and why? Because the ice shelf is a lot thicker now. Huge glaciers of ice are reconnecting there, and they don't want you to know it, because they know that it would damage their argument. Think about it, folks.