Category: humor

The stork has finally showed up!

    

Ok, first part of this story is that I have been waiting for my chickens to lay eggs all summer…

Last Saturday I went out and found that my chickens had laid eggs! While I was surprised that the first eggs were so large, and heavy (I thought maybe they were frozen because they were in the outside chicken run instead of the inside coup) – I took it in stride and was extremely excited that I finally got eggs!

But what I came to find out is that my sadistic sister-in-law (with the help of my eager parents) came over while we were out of town the night before, picking up my broken car that had been fixed, and they placed hard-boiled eggs in my chicken coup. That explained the size & weight of the eggs… I sure would have been surprised when I went to crack them open for Sunday morning pancakes.

I’m not going to forget though; I’m not going to turn the other cheek – and when she least expects it I’m going to get her back, and get her back good…

In the mean time, I went out to the chicken coup this evening, and I have a message for her…

Hey Ellen… go suck on an Egg – in fact actually go suck two! I’ll gladly loan you slop covered eggs I took out of the coup tonight!

 

Pres. Bush’s speech last night

What a huge mess we’re in… but I found it interesting about the references to the “Global Economy” and that some of the laws being put forth right now would allow the the “Federal” Reserve bank (Not a federal organization, but a privately run organization) more power and control over the U.S. economy and financial institutions (and governments).


One bank to rule them all, one bank to find them, one bank to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them!



Let the March of the NeoCons commence! 😉



The Hardest Logic Puzzle in the World….


It’s been called the hardest logic puzzle in the world – it did take me a a while to solve it, without having any hints, clues, and never hearing of the puzzle before… It was a lot of fun…. See if you can figure it out (without cheating!). 🙂



Three gods A, B, and C are called, in some order, ‘True’,


‘False’, and ‘Random’. True always speaks truly, False always speaks


falsely, but whether Random speaks truly or falsely is a completely random


matter. Your task is to determine the identities of A, B, and C by asking


three yes-no questions; each question must be put to exactly one god. The


gods understand English, but will answer all questions in their own language,


in which the words for ‘yes’ and ‘no’ are ‘da’ and ‘ja’, in some order.


You do not know which word means which.



Can you solve it?



To my esteemed scategories cohorts….

I want to formally write a complaint that you guys are intentionally stealing points from me when we play scategories.


Take for example; last night. There was a question that asked us to name something that was in the refrigerator that starts with an N. My answer was “nothing”.


You, my esteemed scategories cohorts refused to accept this answer on the case that you felt that nothing was not something.


Try as I might to help you see the error of your ways by asking you to describe nothing without giving it attributes or qualities which are both necessary and sufficient condition for the being of somethingness, you could only describe nothing by describing something – thus proving my point – and yet, not gaining me points.


I therefore post these three forms of Propositional Logic to affirm the truth of my statement that nothing is really something, and demand a recount of my points! 🙂


Disjunctive Syllogism


Either Nothing is Nothing or Nothing is Something
Nothing is not nothing
Therefore Nothing is Something



Hypothetical Syllogism


If I can describe an object called nothing, then the object called nothing has attributes and qualities
If the object called nothing has attributes and qualities then it must exist as something
I can describe the object called nothing therefore it must exist as something


Modus Ponens


If an object called nothing has descriptive qualities then the object must exist
The object called nothing has descriptive qualities
Therefore the object called nothing exists


If an object exists then it can be included in a set called something
The object called nothing exists
Therefore the object called nothing can be included in a set called something


Word of the day

Today’s word of the day are three legal words that are so cool, you’re bound to make people look at you funny when you use them.



The first word is nonfeasance. This word is used to legally describe someone not performing a duty required of them. For example, when my wife doesn’t make me breakfast, she can be charged by me in the court of the home as being guilty of nonfeasance.



The second word is misfeasance. This word is used to legally describe someone not performing a duty to the quality that was expected. For example, when my wife makes breakfast, but it’s burnt to a crisp because she was busy talking on the phone the whole time she was making it, and not really paying attention to what she was doing, she can be charged by me in the court of the home as being guilty of misfeasance.



The third word is malfeasance. This word is used to legally describe someone who participates in purposeful neglect of carrying out ones prescribed duties. For example, if after reading this blog post, my wife just decides to stop feeding me, and I then die of starvation, she could be held, by me, in the court of the home as being guilty of malfeasance.



Of course, if I really starved to death because she wasn’t feeding me, most people would consider me to have gotten what I deserved being such a lazy, helpless person, but, you get the point anyway…



You know, that reminds me, it’s 1:00 o’clock, and I haven’t had lunch yet, when is my wife coming home!


Should requirements of biblical forgiveness extend to an animal?

Ok, it sounds like a simple question: let’s say your animal does something to piss you off.



You make it very obvious to the animal that what it does was wrong (in psych speak you say “I’m a person, and I have feelings, and what you did really hurt me” – or perhaps you just kick it…).



Then, the animal does it again, deliberately, obviously, purposefully, as if to say “I’m an animal and I’m going to do what I like”.



So, if this animal was a person, you’d be obligated to show compassion on it (for at least 490 times [7*70 for all you mathematically oriented people]), before you could wax it.



So, I’m wondering – do we actually have to forgive an animal 490 times too?



I thought about this long and hard (for all of a couple minutes) – and realized that the answer was an obvious “No”.



Therefore: I’m sending my dog to the meat packers!