skip to main |
skip to sidebar
good evening! i'm over adam-reed's house, and from here i give you your daily installment of tiny damaged notions!
keeping our chins up and staring into the heavens, let's talk about that big ol' satellite of ours.
i mean of course, the moon.
check out this news-blurb! (nurb?):
boom! we're going back to the moon!
not only that, but read the fine print (sometimes called "the article"): we're gonna stay there.
you hear that, hawking! NASA loves you.
but you may be asking yourselves "why? why are we building a home on the moon?"
well, jerk, why not? you don't want to be cool and live on the moon? you know how many space-chicks you'll get with some real estate on the moon?
hear that moon-ladies? NASA's best and brightest are coming for ya.
see, this is exactly why we need to double our expenses and danger: just in case there are moon women who need human love.
but heartless experts disagree. read what those dorks have got to say:
Given the price tag, the danger, and the all-out technical hurdles of sending people to the Moon, not to mention building a long-term home on the closest rock to the Earth, some experts have claimed that manned lunar flights are more quixotic than scientifically sound. Instead, they suggest that robots and unmanned flights can do most of what humans can at half the cost (or less).
(yahoo! news, "http://news.yahoo.com/s/nf/20061205/tc_nf/48523")
robots?! now you want to give human jobs to robots??
listen up right wing conservatives: here's your new scapegoat. robots.
these metal bastards are gonna go take our astronaut jobs and rob sexy scientists of their space-ladies.
why, i'm so angry i could, i could--i could end the post right now!
in fact, i think i will. yeah. out of anger, not hunger.
you keep it real, reeds. i'll see you on the flip-side of a sting. go out with your star-net and catch me a stellar babe.
(pun!)
date: december 4, 2006
starting post time: 8:19am
greeting: welcome to a brand new installment of tiny damaged notions
good morning, reeds! it's [date] at the early hour of [starting post time], and [greeting]!
is it just me, or is anyone else just bored of earth? i mean, come on already. everyday it's the same planet filled with violence, pollution, and a degrading environment due to our own neglect.
isn't it time we bring these ol' fashioned human qualities to another planet?
theoretical physicist stephen hawking sure thinks so. in a radio interview with the BBC, hawking stated that abandoning earth is inevitable, since some kind of nuclear war or an asteroid of some sort could make this planet o' ours a not-so-viable place to live.
hmm, makes sense. and colonizing a new planet sounds pretty fun, doesn't it? but forbes.com, or the fat-ass cloud as i like to call it, decided to rain all over mr. hawking's parade:
if humans have any hope of reaching hospitable planets in other solar systems using the rocket technology that took us to the moon, it'll take, oh, around 50,000 years.
(forbes.com, "http://www.forbes.com/2006/12/03/hawking-planets-space-face-cx_po_1201autofacescan01.html")
fine, forbes. if you want to be a pessimistic-pedro, then you can stay on earth. how does that sound? you and the top 100 hottest movie stars, musicians, and athletes can create your own talented and sexy society.
at least with mel gibson still back on earth, you guys won't have to worry about losing any of that irrational bigotry that this planet has become known for.
Fucking Jews...The Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world.
- Mel Gibson, on the night of his DUI arrest
mmmm, classy.
but back to hawking: he's got a plan.
"a plan for what? i forgot what we were talking about."
a plan for leaving earth, remember? he says it's necessary.
"ohhh, right. so, what's his plan?"
well, according to the fat-ass cloud,
Though it's scientifically impossible for anything to travel faster than the speed of light, Hawking believes people could eventually go just under that speed using a process known as called matter-antimatter annihilation
(forbes.com, "http://www.forbes.com/2006/12/03/hawking-planets-space-face-cx_po_1201autofacescan01.html")
"matter-antimatter annihilation"?
sounds like a safe way to travel.
forbes had more to say about this whole space emigration shindig:
Star Trek aficionados will be well aware that ships such as the Enterprise are propelled using antimatter, a process which is still unworkable in reality though has for years been investigated by NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center.
(forbes.com, "http://www.forbes.com/2006/12/03/hawking-planets-space-face-cx_po_1201autofacescan01.html")
way to show your nerd side, forbes.
star trek aficionados will also be well aware that even though mccoy, on stardate 4770.3, spoke of "the things love can drive a man to--the ecstasies, the miseries, the broken rules, the desperate chances, the glorious failures and the glorious victories," love is still a process unworkable in reality for trekkies--though has for years been investigated through conventions and, for lust, pornography.
i kid. i kid, because i too am a dork.
i sit saddened by the fact that looney tunes shorts which appeared in theaters from the 1930s to 1969--the same favorites you may remember from its syndicated television appearances during your childhood--are no longer shown on TV for the most part due to them being deemed "politically incorrect."
i sit anxiously awaiting the new season of futurama.
i sit, with you.
but not if you're watching star trek. that show sucks.
ending post time: 12:47pm
concluding statement: take the safety off your day and fire some fun into the air
that's all for me, reeds. it's [ending post time], and i'm off to get some work done. [concluding statement]!
