The Good, The Bad, The Fast and The Whiny.

Good News

First of all, I received a nice surprise when I got home last night.

“We have evaluated you Intent to Graduate Petition for the Associate in Arts / Science degree in History. Our evaluation indicates the following:

~ You will be eligible upon satisfactory completion of the courses listed for the Spring 2005 semester on your Intent to Graduate Petition.”

Well I’ll be dipped. The counseling office told me I had another couple classes to go. I’m getting out a semester early. I’ll have a few months off before jumping into University.

Coolness!

Bad News

Taxes suck! :(

O.k., that not really news...

Funny News

Premature Ejaculation Study

Hey, it’s spring break, lemme have some frivolous purile fun.

“The researchers timed ejaculations by giving stopwatches to the sex partners of more than 1,500 men.”

Gee, no pressure honey. *chuckle*

I pulled this article off of Fark.com, and while the commentary on it contained a relatively moderate numbers of men bragging about their “el monstro’s” ability to go for six days on end, much less than was expected really, I do find the 7 minute average to be a little on the shy side.

But the way this experiment was conducted is hardly rigorous scientific methodology. It does not mention age of subject, nor speak of attractiveness or skill of sexual partner, nor does it address the activities that preceded intercourse. Get any guy wound up enough prior and he’ll be lucky to last 30 seconds. ;)

Still no cure for cancer.

Speaking of Science

Something that I have discussed with some friends and wanted to address here is one of the most common claim of Science and Archeological quackery:

“The Scientific / Archeological establishment refuses to consider my theory because it goes against accepted theory.”

This is utter B.S.

Let me tell you someone about the research communities: They love change. If they didn’t love change, discovering something new, why the hell would they continue researching?

Relativity is being supplanted by String Theory. Modern scientists spent years in the lab discovering the Ancient Chinese were actually on to something with ginseng. Rabbits and bats change species classification about every ten years. Scientists spend their lives devoted to the search for new discoveries through the scientific method: They create a theory, they test the theory, if the test is successful (a few times) then the results are published in community journals. It get noticed within the community and other scientists test the theory. The more successful tests by a variety of scientists, the more likely the theory is valid and it will become standard theory. (“Fact” is a very, very hard title to claim in the scientific community, very.)

So whenever someone says that their medication or technique or whathaveyou is perfect and “will put doctors out of business so my work isn’t accepted in the medical/scientific community!” They’re lyin’ their ass off. Their work just hasn’t been able to stand up to the rigorous testing the scientific community requires to keep things like phrenology from being taught in med school.

Archeology is the same way. Despite many public denials, in their heart of hearts, every archeologist wants to be Indiana Jones. Maybe not with the Nazis and the Bullwhip and the Hat (o.k. maybe the Hat), but they do want to discover the Ark of the Covenant, the Holy Grail (which, BTW-Is completely a literary invention of Chretien de Troyes for Arthurian romances. There is no historical mention of such an artifact anywhere before this writer of fiction puts it into his stories.) They would give up large portions of their anatomy to find that one artifact or lost city or new Rosetta Stone that turns the entire historical community on it’s ear, that changes the way we view history and ourselves.

Archeology approaches formulating theories differently though, or at least archeologists should. Modern archeologists look at the artifacts, the end result, and try to divine a theory. They then see if previously collected information and artifacts as well as excavating further to see if they support that theory.

(However, there has been a disturbing trend in the historical and archeological community to create the theory first and try and find the artifacts to make the theory work. In doing so they often ignore artifacts and information collected that do not fit their theory. This is not the way we should work. We look at what did happen and then divine why it happened. Not try and force events that have already taken place into fitting our personal worldview. We gain no understanding of times past by practicing History or Archeology this way.)

For millennia, the site of the Trojan War had been lost to mankind, many considered it just part of Greek myth. But in 1870, an archeologist named Heinrich Schliemann went to Turkey looking for it. Well, guess what? He found it. And while modern archeologists believe that he misidentified the layer of habitation that had to do with the Homer’s famous war, successive excavation by other archeologists proved that it was, in fact, the legendary city.

So when someone like say, Van Daniken, comes along with his half assed theories of aliens constructing the Pyramids, the scientific community sits back and says what they say to every other member of that field with a new theory: “Prove it”. But rather than providing more data and testing theories, Danekin says: “Oh, the archeological establishment doesn’t want anyone to know about my discoveries because they challenge the established order.” He’s a lyin’ whiner. He just has not provided enough data to make his work be taken seriously within the community.

So the instant you hear a scientist, archeologist, new age healer or anyone say “The establishment is trying to suppress my work!” take everything they with a hefty dose of salt.