If Donald Trump was your doctor

My friend, Amy, posted this video, from Informed Citizens, on Facebook a little while ago, and I thought it important to share.

Killer Surgeon from Informed Citizens on Vimeo.

You would never hire a surgeon with no proven experience, or a track record of repeated failure, to operate on you or a loved one, would you?

Well, maybe some of you would, because you hated the woman doctor with years of experience and the proven track record, because she came across as a know-it-all and your buddies Rush and Sean and Roger said you can't trust a girl doctor, especially an old, ugly one, cause, ya know, everyone knows boy doctors are smarter than girl doctors. And this guy Trump said he would totally make your mother better, and that was good enough for you, even though the guy had a whole bunch of medical malpractice suits filed against him and he admitted he had never performed this operation before, but, you know, how hard could it be?

And speaking of Trump, or really Trump supporters, here's a piece from GQ by Drew Magary (whom I enjoy reading over on Deadspin) worth a read.

Here are some of my favorite (printable) lines from the article:

"YOU are the people who want to revolutionize the way America does business by voting for its worst businessman, a disgusting neon pig who only makes money when he causes problems for other people instead of solving them."

[There are so many awesome names for Trump, many of which can be found over at Balloon Juice.]

"YOU are the people willing to overlook the fact that Trump is an unqualified, ignorant sociopath because DURRRR HILLARY IS BAD TOO DURRRR."

[I'm so tired of false equivalence. Aren't you?]

"You are handing the most important job on Earth to Napoleon from Animal Farm." 

[I just love a good literary allusion.]

And I thought it was in the Drew Magary article, but I guess it was in some other one, where the author theorized that a number of people would vote for Donald Trump just to stick it to their liberal sister-in-law, which I do not doubt for a second. But it's kind of like cutting your nose off to spite your face. Only you won't just lose your nose if you voted for Trump.

Of course, none of this -- no facts, no arguments -- will dissuade Trump supporters from believing his lies and voting for him, because... neuroscience. But writing these posts (aka venting) makes me, like Drew Magary, feel a teeny bit better.

A mother's note to her three little scientists

My friend Liz, the long-suffering mother of three curious (and adorable) little boys, posted this on Facebook yesterday, and I had to share.

[Anyone who is or was the mother of a curious boy will appreciate this.]

Dear Boys,

While I appreciate your enthusiasm for scientific experimentation and laud your quest for empirical knowledge…we need to clarify a few things.

The toilet is not designed to determine whether small rubber animals sink or float. Especially when flushed.

The purpose of a ceiling fan is not to test your reflexes. Unanticipated outcomes are almost guaranteed.

The microwave is not a science lab. One of two things will happen, no matter what you put in there: it will melt or it will explode. Neither outcome will make me happy.

Love,

Mom

And speaking of microwaves and science labs... ;-)



You're welcome, Liz!

Silent but deadly? A guide to farts and farting

[Alternate titles: "Let 'er rip!" "Who cut the cheese?" "Break like the wind"]

For everyone who ever wanted to know the answer to the question, Are silent farts worse? Here is the answer from the guys at Asap SCIENCE (a great YouTube Science channel):



Note to self: Stay away -- or in front of -- people who consume lots of eggs, meat, and broccoli.

It takes (smaller) balls to be a good father

Why are some men better fathers -- that is, better at nurturing their offspring -- than others? According to a threesome at Emory University in Atlanta, it may very well have to do with the size of the father's testicles. And it appears that when it comes to nurturing or caring for children, and the family jewels, less is more. (More proof that good things come in small packages?)

How did the intrepid researchers figure this out? In a nutshell, they scanned "the brains and berries" of 70 male volunteers while showing them pictures of their child. And the researchers found that the part or parts of the brain believed to be responsible for nurturing were more active in the fathers with less cojones. 

[Quick aside: Anyone else amused and amazed by the number of synonyms for testicles?]

While the findings are not conclusive, they are consistent with observations of other primates, specifically chimpanzees (larger testicles, not good caregivers) and gorillas (smaller testicles, attentive fathers).

So ladies, when sizing up potential candidates to be the father of your child, "choose dads with smaller 'nads." (Lower testosterone levels also make for a more nurturing parent.)

Btw, you can read the study, titled "Testicular volume is inversely correlated with nurturing-related brain activity in human fathers," here.

Irony, now available in cans and bottles

When I first saw this new ad for Coca-Cola on obesity, I thought it must be a joke.



But the new Coke ad, titled "Coming Together," is the real thing, baby. And it is a joke.

Coke's claim: by adding artificial sweeteners and offering consumers smaller serving sizes, it is fighting obesity, which, by the way, the American Medical Association just recognized as a disease (albeit an easily preventable one, if you don't drink sodas like Coke and Sprite and Fanta).

The problem: artificial sweeteners have been closely tied to obesity and Type 2 diabetes, and are worse for you than sugar. Instead of satisfying your sweet craving, artificial sweeteners make you crave sweets and rewire your taste receptors to dislike healthier, not sweet foods. Which is why so many folks who guzzle Diet Coke and other diet beverages wind up gaining rather than losing weight.

I know. When I met the spouse over 20 years ago, I was a Diet Coke addict -- and weighed almost 30 pounds more than I do now, even though I exercised every other day. When I gave up diet soda (and other "diet" processed foods), I immediately lost 10 pounds. (And when I kicked out sugar and pasta and white bread, I lost another 10 pounds.)

So if you really want to fight obesity, folks, avoid Coca-Cola and other artificially or otherwise sweetened beverages (such as Crystal Light, which is almost as addictive and as bad for you as crystal meth) and stick to water.

And remember, Coke doesn't add life. It just adds pounds.

When cars fly or how The Jetsons is responsible for almost every cool gadget we have

Forget Star Trek. You want to know which 1960s television show has had the greatest impact on technology, inspiring or foreshadowing the creation of many cool gadgets? The Jetsons.

Think about it: flat-screen TVs, online newsreaders, robot vacuum cleaners, video chat, mobile communications devices... and now flying cars. (Though this one doesn't fold up into a briefcase.)



While Terrafugia's new TF-X personal flying vehicle looks pretty cool, and I admit there have been many times I wished my car could fly (mainly while being stuck in traffic on 95 or 495), do I really think that a flying car (no doubt driven by the same people I frequently curse out or you see on those car dealer or car insurance ads) is a good idea? No.

Still, Terrafugia makes the TF-X sound awfully tempting. (You can fly or drive around 500 miles on a single charge or tank or whatever. It fits into a single-car garage. No more being stuck on the Long Island Expressway for hours! And it has a full-vehicle backup parachute system! Though I shudder at the thought of needing to use it.)

So, would you buy a flying car (assuming you could afford it)?

He Deafened Me with Science

I love Thomas Dolby. I love astronomy and space exploration. But astronaut Buzz Aldrin singing "She Blinded Me with Science" with Thomas Dolby? Not so much.



That's okay, Buzz. Not every astronaut can be as musical as Chris Hadfield. (Click on the link to see Hadfield's brilliant cover of David Bowie's "Space Oddity.") And I'm pretty sure Thomas Dolby has never walked on the Moon (though I heard aliens ate his Buick).

Personally, I'm hoping NASA launches another Moon mission, if only so some (musical) astronaut covers The Police's "Walking on the Moon."

Best David Bowie cover ever (Astronaut sings "Space Oddity" in space!)

Here he is, sitting in his tin can far above the Moon
Planet Earth is blue and there's nothing he can do...
except make a cover of David Bowie's "Space Oddity," apparently.

For those who haven't seen astronaut Chris Hadfield's cover of David Bowie's "Space Oddity," which he recorded on the International Space Station, here you go.



This is ground control to Colonel Chris. You've really made the grade.

Best cover of a David Bowie song EVER.

Journalists get hard-on over new penis study

[Alternate title: Note to scientists: It's not about the penis.]

So on Monday, news outlets everywhere got a hard-on about a new Australian study that seemingly confirmed that women find a bigger penis more attractive. (I particularly liked this piece from Science titled "The Final Word on Penis Size?" because, you know, it made it sound all scientific.)

But what the study, titled "Penis size interacts with body shape and height to influence male attractiveness," really revealed is that women, when faced with images of three faceless, computer-generated naked guys, one of whom was short and paunchy with man boobs, another of whom was average size, had a paunch and looked out of shape, and a third who looked like an Olympic athlete and, oh yes, happened to have a longer penis, the chicks rated the third guy more attractive. I know! SHOCKING.

[Australian tax dollars hard at work.]

Indeed, per the Science article (and the study)

...penis size isn't the only thing that matters. It interacts with other traits [like wallet size*], and its effect depends on whether those other traits are already attractive to begin with. If one of the model men was tall and had a masculine, V-shaped torso with broad shoulders and narrower hips, for example, he was considered more attractive than his shorter, stockier counterparts, regardless of penis size.

No, really? Again, let me say, thanks scientists for figuring that out for us. Geez.

What I did find surprising (and amusing) was that the four male scientists who conducted this study (for their own personal edification?) found it, and I quote, "surprising" that if a guy was tall and well built, penis size didn't really make a difference (unless he had a cocktail-size weenie.)

You know what I find attractive? A guy with a big... smile, a big heart, and a big brain.

*Sorry, I couldn't resist.

Cat physics

Great flipping cats! This video explaining how and why cats always land on their feet is awesome -- and educational.



Note: No cats were hurt in the making of this flipping cat video. (As for the humans, they are lucky those cats didn't rake them.)

What you need to know in case of an alien invasion

Sure, you know what to do in case of a zombie apocalypse. But what if aliens invade?

Fortunately, I found this handy video, which doesn't so much as prepare you for an alien invasion  (short answer: we're f**ked) as much as clarify or "bust" certain alien invasion myths.

The good news: They don't want to eat us. (Though except for that guy in Miami, who would want to eat one of us? Have you seen us humans lately? Yuck.)

The bad news (for you sci-fi fan boys): No hot alien nookie action. (Though I think the scientists -- and SourceFed -- could be wrong here. Aliens could certainly try to have sex with us -- hey, we've all seen the movies -- or vice versa. It's just unlikely it would result in anything.)

We're all doomed!

Alternate title: Aiiieee Robot

Don't those fools at DARPA* realize that it's one small step from creating a robot that can master steps...



to creating a robot that can master us humans?!



And you people thought Battlestar Galactica was just some science fiction/fantasy show! HA!

*Click on the YouTube link for additional information about the DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) Robotics Challenge (and some amusing comments).

Particle physics meets the Jersey Shore?

Okay, so I am "slightly obsessed" with the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), the world's largest particle accelerator (affectionately known as the "Big Bang Machine")....

[If you are wondering about the Jersey Shore reference, keep reading.]



And now comes word from Geneva, where the Large Hadron Collider (aka the Black Hole Maker) is located, albeit 100 meters underground, that scientists there are on the verge of a major scientific breakthrough, which, considering that they are trying to recreate the Big Bang, does not strike me as good news. Specifically, scientists are on the hunt for "hot dense matter."

[FYI: The picture above is a computer-generated graphic showing the tracks of more than 100 subatomic particles resulting from the collision of protons in the Large Hadron Collider's Compact Muon Solenoid at an energy of 7 trillion electron volts. Talkin' 'bout some "Hot Stuff"*...]

Now, I am not a scientist, but I do try to stay informed on what's going on in the world, and if scientists really wanted to find "hot dense matter," they could have saved $10 billion and just watched a couple of episodes of Jersey Shore. (Talk about a void...)

Note to CERN scientists: If you do find "hot dense matter" how about naming the new subatomic particle (that goes out with a bang) a "Snooki"?

In related news, for those of you wondering what would happen if you put your hand inside the Large Hadron Collider while it was accelerating particles, wonder no more! (Maybe.)



*Bonus points if you got the Donna Summer reference.

New super laser really super, or just an excuse to resurrect Laserium and cut down super spies?

According to a recent AP report, engineers at the National Ignition Facility at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California have completed the world's most powerful (and possibly expensive, at $3.5 billion and counting) laser, "capable of simulating the energy force of a hydrogen bomb and the sun itself."

The lead scientist's name wouldn't happen to be Auric Goldfinger, would it?



Unlike Herr Goldfinger's little toy, however, the new super laser is made up of 192 separate laser beams. (Because apparently the 60-beam system at the University of Rochester just wasn't butch enough.) Which makes it sound a wee bit like those old Laserium shows, without the really cool music or substance abuse.

Or a Frankie Goes to Hollywood music video.



The "super" laser's primary purpose? To boldly go where no laser has gone before. (Okay, technically, it's to help government physicists ensure the reliability of the nation's nuclear weapons as they become older. But that doesn't sound nearly as cool.)

And while I am sure the super laser mission is really cool, do scientists really need a $3.5 billion super laser? Really? I know you scientific-type guys are bummed and all since your other big toy, the Large Hadron Collider, went offline, but a super laser? Couldn't you find something else to do with all that time and $3.5 billion, like solve world hunger or fix the global financial system?

Well if you must build a super laser, you could at least let the public in at night to see it, and while you're at it, how 'bout playing some really cool music? Just sayin'.