Words are funny old things.
People tend to give them whatever meaning they feel like at the time. Especially people who work in advertising.
However, here's what some of the words and phrases commonly used by advertisers really mean:
exotic = "contains mango"
tropical = "contains pineapple"
refreshing = "water-based"
revolutionary = "they come, and they go...round and round but nothing really changes"
probiotic = "its like a futuristic cyborg fighting against the forces of ill-health. And a bit yogurty"
new and improved = "due to industry regulations, and lawsuits from next of kin, we have been forced to stop using the older ingredients"
indulgent = "this product will make you fat and dramatically increase your odds of a heart attack"
organic = "still covered in mud" in the case of vegetables, and "expensive" in all cases
low-fat = "higher in sugar"
fat-free = "really high in sugar"
Free from artificial colourings and preservatives = "contains artificial flavourings"
may decrease the risk of heart disease = "we have no idea if this might reduce the risk of heart disease, and don't want to find out in case, as we suspect, it doesn't"
designer = "looks odd and costs a lot, but it must be good, right guys?"
rustic = "poorly made using inefficient methods"
real women = "slightly overweight and extremely out of shape"
family pack = "enough for one real person"
Serves 6-8 = "serves 1-2"
Edit 5/6/2008
Juice Drink = "an almost homeopathic dilution of juice in water, topped off with artificial sweeteners. 9 out of 10 packs will contain at least 1 molecule of juice
May contain Nuts = "almost certainly doesn't contain nuts, unless it is an obviously nutty product, but given that a) people will sue over anything and b) philosophically, nothing is truly certain, we felt it wise to add this disclaimer"
Contents may be hot = "the contents are probably tepid or luke-warm at best, but to protect us from litigious and seemingly rather stupid gits we are obliged to point out that our coffee may be hot. "
Enjoy as part of a healthy diet / active lifestyle = "this product is bad for you, make sure all the other products you eat are much healthier, and do lots of excercise, or this will make you massive"
Value = "you get what you pay for, and you didn't pay much for this did you..."
Tuesday, 27 May 2008
Monday, 26 May 2008
Hovind Scale Calculator
The Hovind Scale - Calculate Hovind Factors with ease!
Note: This is just a back-up version of the original Hovind Factor Calculator which you can find here.
The form fields on this blog version are cut off as they are too wide to fit, but if you click on them they will expand to show the full options!
The Hovind Scale is used to rate Creationist statements about the nature of reality and assign a value to how ignorant, scientifically illiterate and / or outright dishonest they are.
It was designed by the forumites of RichardDawkins.net, and one of them set out the details on their blog here.
It is named after the convicted fraudster and Young Earth Creationist Kent Hovind.
He is currently serving time because of his "overly flexible" attitude to the truth, and before his incarceration was regularly lying for Jesus.
Honesty is the main factor in determining the Hovind Factor - a truly honest Creationist cannot get a Hovind Factor of more than 20. Creationists who knowingly seek to deceive will score highly.
Since honesty can be hard to determine (unless there happens to be supporting evidence like court records), and since many zealots are truly sincere in their beliefs, this calculator also includes the True Believer™ Rating (TBR)
which simply removes the Mendacity factor from the equation and scales up accordingly to
give a maximum score of 100 (if Mendacity is rated at maximum, the TBR will equal the Hovind Factor).
Once you have ascertained the Hovind Factor, you can get a general idea of what level of Creationist you are dealing with by checking their score against the descriptions below:
100 - Utter Hovind - the person might actually BE Hovind (if he hasmnet access from his cell), but if they're not they are certainly talking complete and utter Hovind! Lies and ignorance knowingly combined and asserted as fact! The state of the art of Lying for Jesus.
90-99 - Positively Hovindian
- while not managing to be quite as ignorant or mendacious as the master himself, this person
still displays positively Hovindian levels of scientific illiteracy and dishonesty
60-89 - VenomFangTastic
- not quite up in the fully Kentian levels, as there may be some slightly mitigating circumstances
(youth or inexperience for example), but still a person who can be relied on to produce long winded and scientifically illiterate or self-contradictory arguments ex recto at a moment's notice
30-59- Profoundly Creotarded - This person likely has little or no scientific knowledge, and they are actively Lying for Jesus at every opportunity.
21-30 - Creotarded- A run of the mill Creotard, with a balance of ignorance, illogic and
mendacity
12-20 - Partially
Creotarded - Some very serious misunderstandings about reality, and a hint of zealotry beginning to rear its ugly head
6-11- Pushing The Limits of Decency - starting to go beyond what is reasonable, but dishonesty or scientific illiteracy are becoming too obvious to ignore.
1-5 - Surprisingly Decent
- a pretty good effort, with a combined honesty / scientific understanding far beyond
the typical Creationist zealot. You might well be able to have a sensible discussion with this person. Educated laymen with a genuine desire to explore the issues may well turn up in this category.
0 - The Blue Butterfly Effect - a well constructed and intellectually honest argument, informed by a comprehensive general scientific understanding and in-depth knowledge of the specifics of any relevant scientific work. If you want to debate this person, you'd better know
what you're talking about!
Online Hovind-Factor Calculator designed by Alltruism from RichardDawkins.net
Note: This is just a back-up version of the original Hovind Factor Calculator which you can find here.
The form fields on this blog version are cut off as they are too wide to fit, but if you click on them they will expand to show the full options!
The Hovind Scale is used to rate Creationist statements about the nature of reality and assign a value to how ignorant, scientifically illiterate and / or outright dishonest they are.
It was designed by the forumites of RichardDawkins.net, and one of them set out the details on their blog here.
It is named after the convicted fraudster and Young Earth Creationist Kent Hovind.
He is currently serving time because of his "overly flexible" attitude to the truth, and before his incarceration was regularly lying for Jesus.
Honesty is the main factor in determining the Hovind Factor - a truly honest Creationist cannot get a Hovind Factor of more than 20. Creationists who knowingly seek to deceive will score highly.
Since honesty can be hard to determine (unless there happens to be supporting evidence like court records), and since many zealots are truly sincere in their beliefs, this calculator also includes the True Believer™ Rating (TBR)
which simply removes the Mendacity factor from the equation and scales up accordingly to
give a maximum score of 100 (if Mendacity is rated at maximum, the TBR will equal the Hovind Factor).
Once you have ascertained the Hovind Factor, you can get a general idea of what level of Creationist you are dealing with by checking their score against the descriptions below:
100 - Utter Hovind - the person might actually BE Hovind (if he hasmnet access from his cell), but if they're not they are certainly talking complete and utter Hovind! Lies and ignorance knowingly combined and asserted as fact! The state of the art of Lying for Jesus.
90-99 - Positively Hovindian
- while not managing to be quite as ignorant or mendacious as the master himself, this person
still displays positively Hovindian levels of scientific illiteracy and dishonesty
60-89 - VenomFangTastic
- not quite up in the fully Kentian levels, as there may be some slightly mitigating circumstances
(youth or inexperience for example), but still a person who can be relied on to produce long winded and scientifically illiterate or self-contradictory arguments ex recto at a moment's notice
30-59- Profoundly Creotarded - This person likely has little or no scientific knowledge, and they are actively Lying for Jesus at every opportunity.
21-30 - Creotarded- A run of the mill Creotard, with a balance of ignorance, illogic and
mendacity
12-20 - Partially
Creotarded - Some very serious misunderstandings about reality, and a hint of zealotry beginning to rear its ugly head
6-11- Pushing The Limits of Decency - starting to go beyond what is reasonable, but dishonesty or scientific illiteracy are becoming too obvious to ignore.
1-5 - Surprisingly Decent
- a pretty good effort, with a combined honesty / scientific understanding far beyond
the typical Creationist zealot. You might well be able to have a sensible discussion with this person. Educated laymen with a genuine desire to explore the issues may well turn up in this category.
0 - The Blue Butterfly Effect - a well constructed and intellectually honest argument, informed by a comprehensive general scientific understanding and in-depth knowledge of the specifics of any relevant scientific work. If you want to debate this person, you'd better know
what you're talking about!
Online Hovind-Factor Calculator designed by Alltruism from RichardDawkins.net
Friday, 23 May 2008
The Hovind Scale
I created an online calculator to help work out the Hovind Factor of Creationist statements.
The Hovind Scale was created by the forumites of RichardDawkins.net and described by one of them here. Today it received a mention on PZ Myers legendary blog Pharyngula.
As you can see from Google, it's rapidly become an internationally accepted measurement:
Google results for The Hovind Scale
.
Check it out here and calculate the Hovind Factor of any Creationist utterances you hear!
The Hovind Scale is used to rate Creationist statements about the nature of reality and assign a value to how ignorant, scientifically illiterate and / or outright dishonest they are.
It is named after the convicted fraudster and Young Earth Creationist Kent Hovind. He is currently serving time because of his "overly flexible" attitude to the truth, and before his incarceration was regularly lying for Jesus.
Honesty is the main factor in determining the Hovind Factor - a truly honest Creationist cannot get a Hovind Factor of more than 20. Creationists who knowingly seek to deceive will score highly.
Once you have ascertained the Hovind Factor, you can get a general idea of what level of Creationist you are dealing with by checking their score against the descriptions below:
100 - Utter Hovind - the person might actually BE Hovind (if he has net access from his cell), but if they're not they are certainly talking complete and utter Hovind! Lies and ignorance knowingly combined and asserted as fact! The state of the art of Lying for Jesus.
90-99 - Positively Hovindian - while not managing to be quite as ignorant or mendacious as the master himself, this person still displays positively Hovindian levels of scientific illiteracy and dishonesty
60-89 - VenomFangTastic - not quite up in the fully Kentian levels, as there may be some slightly mitigating circumstances (youth or inexperience for example), but still a person who can be relied on to produce long winded and scientifically illiterate or self-contradictory arguments ex recto at a moment's notice
30-59 - Profoundly Creotarded - This person likely has little or no scientific knowledge, and they are actively Lying for Jesus at every opportunity.
21-30 - Creotarded - A run of the mill Creotard, with a balance of ignorance, illogic and mendacity
12-20 - Partially Creotarded - Some very serious misunderstandings about reality, and a hint of zealotry beginning to rear its ugly head
6-11 - Pushing The Limits of Decency - starting to go beyond what is reasonable, but dishonesty or scientific illiteracy are becoming too obvious to ignore.
1-5 - Surprisingly Decent - a pretty good effort, with a combined honesty / scientific understanding far beyond the typical Creationist zealot. You might well be able to have a sensible discussion with this person. Educated laymen with a genuine desire to explore the issues may well turn up in this category.
0 - The Blue Butterfly Effect - a well constructed and intellectually honest argument, informed by a comprehensive general scientific understanding and in-depth knowledge of the specifics of any relevant scientific work. If you want to debate this person, you'd better know what you're talking about!
The Hovind Scale was created by the forumites of RichardDawkins.net and described by one of them here. Today it received a mention on PZ Myers legendary blog Pharyngula.
As you can see from Google, it's rapidly become an internationally accepted measurement:
Google results for The Hovind Scale
.
Check it out here and calculate the Hovind Factor of any Creationist utterances you hear!
The Hovind Scale is used to rate Creationist statements about the nature of reality and assign a value to how ignorant, scientifically illiterate and / or outright dishonest they are.
It is named after the convicted fraudster and Young Earth Creationist Kent Hovind. He is currently serving time because of his "overly flexible" attitude to the truth, and before his incarceration was regularly lying for Jesus.
Honesty is the main factor in determining the Hovind Factor - a truly honest Creationist cannot get a Hovind Factor of more than 20. Creationists who knowingly seek to deceive will score highly.
Once you have ascertained the Hovind Factor, you can get a general idea of what level of Creationist you are dealing with by checking their score against the descriptions below:
100 - Utter Hovind - the person might actually BE Hovind (if he has net access from his cell), but if they're not they are certainly talking complete and utter Hovind! Lies and ignorance knowingly combined and asserted as fact! The state of the art of Lying for Jesus.
90-99 - Positively Hovindian - while not managing to be quite as ignorant or mendacious as the master himself, this person still displays positively Hovindian levels of scientific illiteracy and dishonesty
60-89 - VenomFangTastic - not quite up in the fully Kentian levels, as there may be some slightly mitigating circumstances (youth or inexperience for example), but still a person who can be relied on to produce long winded and scientifically illiterate or self-contradictory arguments ex recto at a moment's notice
30-59 - Profoundly Creotarded - This person likely has little or no scientific knowledge, and they are actively Lying for Jesus at every opportunity.
21-30 - Creotarded - A run of the mill Creotard, with a balance of ignorance, illogic and mendacity
12-20 - Partially Creotarded - Some very serious misunderstandings about reality, and a hint of zealotry beginning to rear its ugly head
6-11 - Pushing The Limits of Decency - starting to go beyond what is reasonable, but dishonesty or scientific illiteracy are becoming too obvious to ignore.
1-5 - Surprisingly Decent - a pretty good effort, with a combined honesty / scientific understanding far beyond the typical Creationist zealot. You might well be able to have a sensible discussion with this person. Educated laymen with a genuine desire to explore the issues may well turn up in this category.
0 - The Blue Butterfly Effect - a well constructed and intellectually honest argument, informed by a comprehensive general scientific understanding and in-depth knowledge of the specifics of any relevant scientific work. If you want to debate this person, you'd better know what you're talking about!
Thursday, 15 May 2008
Election Pledge - An end to unwanted teenage pregnancy
I've just been watching a program called Britain's Youngest Grannies. One of them has been a grandma since the age of 32.
Most of them wish they had not got pregnant during their teenage years.
But fear not - should I win the election and become Prime Minister I'll get this problem solved immediately.
Here's my solution:
into this:
...problem solved!
I take it I can count on your vote at the next election? ;-)
-Alltruism
Leader of the All True Party - the only party that offers simple and effective solutions to all society's problems!
Most of them wish they had not got pregnant during their teenage years.
But fear not - should I win the election and become Prime Minister I'll get this problem solved immediately.
Here's my solution:
Force manufacturers to put this:
into this:
...problem solved!
I take it I can count on your vote at the next election? ;-)
-Alltruism
Leader of the All True Party - the only party that offers simple and effective solutions to all society's problems!
Friday, 9 May 2008
Darth Cormac
Amazingly, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, Archbishop of Westminster, has , in the same speech in which he conceded Christians should "respect atheists", has suggested that he thinks it is dangerous to be governed by reason alone.
He was saying that societies ruled only by reason "were like those created by Hitler and Stalin".
It is hard to believe that someone who spouts such nonsense is permitted to hold a position of such power and influence. Using reason to govern our behaviour is a far cry from what Hitler and Stalin did. They were both distinctly unreasonable.
Darth Cormac seems to think that reason is a path to the dark side, yet being a Catholic he believes he literally consumes human flesh and blood.
Only someone who believes in an all-knowing sky-faerie could think that reason leads to being unreasonable. Go Darth!
He was saying that societies ruled only by reason "were like those created by Hitler and Stalin".
It is hard to believe that someone who spouts such nonsense is permitted to hold a position of such power and influence. Using reason to govern our behaviour is a far cry from what Hitler and Stalin did. They were both distinctly unreasonable.
Darth Cormac seems to think that reason is a path to the dark side, yet being a Catholic he believes he literally consumes human flesh and blood.
Only someone who believes in an all-knowing sky-faerie could think that reason leads to being unreasonable. Go Darth!Wednesday, 7 May 2008
Monday, 5 May 2008
Celebrities: How Tall Are They Really?
I've been hearing a lot of people go on about how short all the Hollywood actors are, how Tom Cruise wears special shoes to boost his height etc. But could this be true?
Are all the Hollywood action heroes really suffering from inhibited verticality?
I've read the heights of various celebrities on various websites and magazines (don't ask why I read such horrific celebrity nonsense, the shame is still to great for me to answer!), but seeing numbers on a page doesn't really give a good idea of how they all compare to each other.
Therefore, in the interests of increased understanding, I have used the latest technology (Open Office 2.4 no less) to produce a highly scientific graph.
Thanks to the wonders of modern computing I can now present a meaningful comparison of celebrity heights - ever wanted to know how far up Shaquille O'Neal Gary Coleman's head would be?
I hope not, but if you did, then your question is about to be answered:
I've included myself as a comparison (I'm about average height, maybe an inch or so above it), and as you can clearly see a monkey up a pole (6 foot) comes up to about Shaq's neck.
I'm about half a head taller than both Cruise and Banderas, who are both widely rumoured to be tiny, but as this graph shows, actually are quite normal. At least as far as height is concerned anyway.
The top of pint-sized popster Kylie's head would come up to about nose height on both these Hollywood heroes, and to just under my chin.
She'd probably come up to just under the height of Shaq's nipples. Yes, see how modern technology can reveal highly useful (and not even slightly disturbing) information - even 20 years ago we would have had no way to find out how far up basket-ball stars pop-stars' heads would come (save getting them to stand near each other - a highly expensive proposition!), but now we can calculate it in the privacy of our own homes.
Who knows that wonders technology will enable in the next 20 years?
Are all the Hollywood action heroes really suffering from inhibited verticality?
I've read the heights of various celebrities on various websites and magazines (don't ask why I read such horrific celebrity nonsense, the shame is still to great for me to answer!), but seeing numbers on a page doesn't really give a good idea of how they all compare to each other.
Therefore, in the interests of increased understanding, I have used the latest technology (Open Office 2.4 no less) to produce a highly scientific graph.
Thanks to the wonders of modern computing I can now present a meaningful comparison of celebrity heights - ever wanted to know how far up Shaquille O'Neal Gary Coleman's head would be?
I hope not, but if you did, then your question is about to be answered:
I've included myself as a comparison (I'm about average height, maybe an inch or so above it), and as you can clearly see a monkey up a pole (6 foot) comes up to about Shaq's neck.
I'm about half a head taller than both Cruise and Banderas, who are both widely rumoured to be tiny, but as this graph shows, actually are quite normal. At least as far as height is concerned anyway.
The top of pint-sized popster Kylie's head would come up to about nose height on both these Hollywood heroes, and to just under my chin.
She'd probably come up to just under the height of Shaq's nipples. Yes, see how modern technology can reveal highly useful (and not even slightly disturbing) information - even 20 years ago we would have had no way to find out how far up basket-ball stars pop-stars' heads would come (save getting them to stand near each other - a highly expensive proposition!), but now we can calculate it in the privacy of our own homes.
Who knows that wonders technology will enable in the next 20 years?
Sunday, 4 May 2008
International Starwars Day
Yes, it's May the Fourth, the most appropriately dated International Day of all time - International Starwars Day: May the Fourth be with you!
Starwars has been one of the biggest, if not the biggest, cultural phenomena of the last 31 years.
Since its release in 1977 people have been enjoying the space opera that is Starwars, now comprising of 6 films plus some spin-offs (Ewoks, Droids, Clone Wars, numerous computer games and more).
Some people even liked Jar Jar Binks, but they should not admit this in front of any hardcore Starwars fans since to them Jar Jar is anathema.
Many a grown man still harbours fantasies involving lightsabers and Sith Lords. Men between about 5 and 55 who deny having such fantasies are either liars or genuinely didn't see the films while they were young and impressionable enough to be instilled with the secret desire to be a Jedi Knight.
The Jedi religion has won many converts in the real world, with 0.7% of people in the 2001 UK Census declaring themselves as Jedi, and according to the survey results, Jedi was the third most popular religion in Scotland.
New Zealand had the highest per capita population of reported Jedi in the world in 2o01, with 1.5%. This would have made it the second most popular religion in the country, but tragically the spoilsports at Statistics New Zealand didn't count allow it to count officially. I sense that they may have been infiltrated by agents of the Sith ;-)
On Starwars day you should gather your friends around you and enjoy a special Starwars supper:
Starwars has also been parodied on many occasions - some of the best include:
Watch the video to "The Saga Begins" on Youtube. Definitely a hit I reckon!
I'll leave you all with perhaps the ultimate home-made lightsaber action this side of Tatooine - The Starwars Kid:
Raise a glass to the Force, gloss over the dodgy brother-sister kiss, and give one another Starwars-related gifts* (they probably won't be surprises though...if the recipient is a true Starwars fan they will have surely have felt your presents!).
Happy Starwars Day everyone....May the Fourth be with you!
*if you've got lots of spare cash then buy this R2D2 home cinema projector!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)