inicio mail me! sindicaci;ón

Archive for philosophy

Brooklyn’s Trojan Horse

An open letter to Frank Gehry. By Jonathan Lethem

haha

Stephen Colbert’s 2006 Commencement Address at Knox College

frank gehry documentary

Sketches of Frank Gehry – Trailer

Are Superheroes G-d?

What do the superheroes Mothman, Atom Smasher, Marvel Boy, Leviathan, and the Thing all have in common? They’re all Jews. Don’t believe me? The internet never lies

under odysseus

for all those yosefblog scholars among us: Under Odysseus is a blog written by Eurylochus, a Greek participating in the Trojan War.

“There was a lot of shit-talking. Hector kept shouting that Ajax wasn’t much of a substitution for Achilles. Ajax would respond that Hector was just flattering himself.”

(via kottke)

IOI’s

in case you were wondering what IOI was….

yummy yummy

scientists think they’re special because they now understand why cheerios clump together in milk. Duh, I think I figured this out when I was 9. Now, if you want some real science, try to figure out coffee stain rings on your own. I guess it comes down to this:
kid food:kid science::adult food:adult science.

math

i didn’t read this whole article, but from the picture, it doesn’t look like this guy is still eating his lunch. i don’t get it.

your daily dose of scientology

Cruise, a devoted follower of the bizarre Church of Scientology, said: “I was much happier in previous existences when I wrote plays, composed music, conquered nations, discovered continents and developed cures for diseases”I only took my present form because Bingodulla, whom all Scientologists worship as the Supreme Thetan, selected me to spread the gospel of Scientology to the glib, uninformed masses.

“I really would have preferred being a brain surgeon or a research scientist in this life.”

it’s been a while, so here’s tom cruise at it again.

scientific truth

this paper concludes that over half of the scientific papers published in major journals are incorrect. New Scientist’s article about it at least questions whether the paper itself is correct.

My assessment would be as follows: Any research mentioned in New Scientist and not any real journals is more than 50% likely to be incorrect or exaggerated. So it seems we’re okay. (just like wrongs making a right, at least in the U.S. and territories.)

« Previous entries · Next entries »