The Secret Origin of Tail Continued

Posted on 11 November 2017 by Larry Russwurm

Posted in Cartoon, comics, Humour | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

The Insidious Malevolence of Krypton

Posted on 4 November 2017 by Larry Russwurm

Many years ago, the planet Krypton almost stamped out its Kryptonians. I used to think that Kryptonians like Superman and Supergirl and Kandorians were just unlucky that Krypton exploded taking with it many loved ones. But I no longer think that way. Instead I now see the insidious malevolence that is Krypton.

There seems to be no explanation about why Krypton exploded. Maybe it was Kharma. Maybe Krypton was tired of feeling underground nuclear tests, fracking and the mining of its depths.

So Krypton itself might have decided to take the ultimate step – taking its own life in order to wipe out the hated Kryptonians. Hearsay says that it exploded but not before some Kryptonians made it into the safety of space. Well, what they imagined was the safety of space.

But Krypton wasn’t done in its plot against Kryptonians. Those pieces of the exploded Krypton, followed Superman, Supergirl and Kandorians into space. And those pieces of Krypton were detrimental to the surviving Kryptonians health.

Green Kryptonite weakens Kryptonians so much so that too much exposure will kill the Kryptonians. This is the Achilles’ heel of the almost unbeatable Kryptonians that make it to a yellow sun.

Red Kryptonite is also detrimental to Kryptonians. It changes Kryptonians in weird and unexpected ways. These ways can lead to the death of the Krytonians, too.

There are many more types of Kryptonite all of which are detrimental to Kryptonians.

I bet Kandorians are hard at work examining their soil for ways that it might kill the bottle city inhabitants. That soil may seem properly subjugated by the Kandorians but it is looking for a chance – no matter how slim – to kill the Kandorians.

Not only did Krypton manage to stamp out most Kryptonians, it also managed to follow them out into space and threaten the survivors again. Clearly Krypton has it out for its former inhabitants. Maybe one day, Krypton will get the job done of stamping out all Kryptonians.

Posted in Art, Humour, Science Fiction, Stage and Screen | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Tail: The First Patrol

Posted on 28 October 2017 by Larry Russwurm

 

Posted in Cartoon, comics, Humour | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Secret Origin of Tail

Posted on 21 October 2017 by Larry Russwurm

Posted in Cartoon, comics, Humour | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment

Little Geney

Posted on 14 October 2017 by Larry Russwurm

This website has talked about Barry Manilow’s Mandy and how obvious a trick the now out-of-the-closet Manilow was making with the apparent heterosexual love song. We also speculated that perhaps someone in Boston is gay with their song Amanda (a man duh!)

Another closeted gay person in 1980 was Elton John. I guess teaming up with Kiki Dee in 1976 for a love song wasn’t a good enough cover for Elton. He wrote a song and professional lyricist Gary Osborne wrote the lyrics. But I bet that Elton had input to the lyrics since he would be the one to sing this song for the rest of his career. So the song became a love song for “Little Jeannie”. How shockingly heterosexual a refrain.

Spelt like this, Jeannie is obviously a woman’s name. But Elton never spells it out. He just sings the sounds which could just as easily be little Geney or a derivative of the male name, Gene.

Why was Elton (or Gary Osborne for Elton) so specific in this love song? It is more than possible that at the time Elton had a crush on one of the famous Genes from around this time. I can name 3 famous Genes from the time. Gene Siskel (the film critic), Gene Hackman (the actor) and Gene Simmons (the bassist for Kiss).

Really, though, Siskel seems a bit stodgy and Hackman was more of a character actor than a good looking leading man, so it seems that Simmons might be more likely to bring out the attraction in Elton. As well, Elton might want to select from his own kind (fellow musicians). So I am betting that Little Jeannie was written about Simmons.

To cement this idea, drag queens are one segment of the population that seems to attract gays. And not even drag queens wear as much makeup or dress more gaudily than Gene Simmons in his full regalia. And it’s not too hard to see with the over use and over extension of his tongue and the rumours perpetrated by Kiss about how many women they had bedded, it was very possible that Gene Simmons was over compensating for something. Perhaps he might even be gay.

But the most pertinent evidence is in the fact that Kiss was more like a circus act than any other artist(s) I know. And Little Jeannie contains the strange lyric “I want you to be my acrobat, I want you to be my lover”. If that doesn’t make you think of the circus then nothing will.

But Simmons is likely heterosexual and not interested in Elton’s overtures as history shows. Still, knowing Gene Simmons, I think the main reason he didn’t accept such obvious attention from Elton was because he asked, “Little? What exactly about me seems little?!” Simmons seems to be overcompensating still, which shows in his recent attempt to trademark the Texas Longhorn’s hand gesture.

Posted in Humour, Language, Music, Social Science, Stage and Screen | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Trillion Dollar Family

Posted on 7 October 2017 by Larry Russwurm

Let’s start out with the definition of a million dollar family. This is said to be composed of a family with a mother and father that has a mini-me for each sex. I.e. there is a mother, father, daughter and son. I am going to use this strict definition of the million dollar family although I have heard a million dollar family might also be the family that wasn’t as efficient in producing mini-mes but still got there. For example there might be three daughters before a son is born to round out the family.

Because I am using the more strict definition of the million dollar family there is a 50% chance of it occurring for each heterosexual couple that only has two children. In a lesbian or gay family, in order for it to have two mini-mes there is only a 25 % occurrence of this family or half the chance. Thus I would like to call this family a 2 million dollar family.

Sticking with the idea that a million dollar family is just an efficient way to have mini-mes for the parents, I call it a billion dollar family when a son and daughter are produced by a single birth. In other words if heterosexuals got a son and daughter from a single birth of twins, that is the more efficient way to produce mini-mes and they thus get the tag of the billion dollar family.

Again, a lesbian couple having two girls as twins, has only a 25% chance of that happening whereas the billion dollar family has a 50 % chance of their family having a son and a daughter. So the lesbian couple with mini-mes as twins is a 2 billion dollar family. Gays can also have a 2 billion dollar family.

Now a trillion dollar family needs to be more efficient, still. Let’s say a single fertilized egg splits in two. Isn’t that more efficient? The problem here is that both offspring are going to be the same sex so the trillion dollar family is impossible unless lesbian or gay.

I think a trillion dollar family must also be rarer – the closer to a one in a thousand chance (compared to the billion dollar family), the more grounded in reality I think it is. So that might throw out the lesbian or gay family from being a trillion dollar baby. Identical twins are at most a factor of 10 less likely than fraternal twins. So let’s call the identical twins with the same sex parents a 20 billion dollar family.

That might seem to get rid of all the choices but I will just state that the trillion dollar family has a mother and father with transgender identical twin babies. If, as the twins age, they go through with sexual reassignment surgery then the parents would have had mini-mes — just not at the same time.

Plus, despite appearances, identical twins are different. So it would be likely that one would have the sexual reassignment surgery even years ahead of the other. The second one might wait to see how their sibling deals with being the opposite sex. If the first one has many regrets, the second one might never change their sex. So the family might even, at a glance, remind one of the original million dollar family. And that is another possible trillion dollar family.

Posted in Humour, Language, Mathematics, Science, Social Science | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Giv’ ‘er Should Be the Title of the New Imagine Dragons Album

Posted on 30 September 2017 by Larry Russwurm

I’m just going to list the titles off the album “Evolve” and put them in a particular order with little but some explanation:

Believer
Thunder
Mouth of the River
Start Over
Whatever it Takes
Yesterday
Walking the Wire (contains e and r)
Rise Up
Dancing in the Dark
I Don’t Know Why (which should be called “Dangerous” for its best part which is the bridge)
I’ll Make It Up To You

So that is at most two songs that don’t have both an ‘e’ and ‘r’ in them. And most of the songs have the “er” together. I believe this is both willful and premeditated on the part of Imagine Dragons.

That’s almost a home run for the “er” part of “Giv’ ‘er” but what about the “giv’”? Well the song Mouth of the River has a line that goes: “And the wrath of the giver”. So that is my rationale for why the title should be “Giv’ ‘er”.

Actually that whole chorus in Mouth of the River rhymes the “er”: “Oh the mouth of the river, And the wrath of the giver, With the hands of a sinner, Oh the mouth of the river”.

This is more fun you can have with title mining, which I think I’ve caught Imagine Dragons doing on at least two albums. Will they bring title mining to a climax on their next album? Wait about 3 years and see.

Posted in Humour, Language, Music | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Malka

Posted on 23 September 2017 by Larry Russwurm

I just recently figured what “Imma” means. It means “I am going to”. Just look at it. It’s not a proper contraction because there are no apostrophes (and wouldn’t it have to use 3 apostrophes?) and its not a proper acronym because there is no “g” or “t” and it has a useless “m”. This doesn’t use any of the shortening rules of English.

For now it’s stuck in the slang ghetto so for the time being, proper English pushers can ignore it. It’s just that English is a fluid language that keeps evolving. I bet “Imma” becomes proper English eventually. And I’m ready for that time.

I’ll insist on making my own word “malka” a proper English word, too. Currently it isn’t an English word or acronym, which is why I picked it. It stands for “my abusive licence agreement” with a silent “k”. It attacks abusive EULAs or “end user licence agreements”. Or those computer contracts that no one reads and only clicks “I agree” at the end of the too long contract.

More properly, I define it as meaning: “anyone who uses the word malka, if they represent a company that has any abusive EULA, henceforth negates all of their company’s abusive EULAs by uttering or writing or printing or typing the word malka. This lasts in perpetuity and stretches back to the 1800s when the first mechanical computers were made.”

So all that remains is acceptance of the term “malka” and the tricking of representatives of said companies into uttering this word. I dunno. I’m a science fiction writer, maybe I could suggest doing some weird science fiction thing that could be called doing a malka. Or better yet make a song with nonsensical lyrics that people are bound to repeat and throw a “malka” in there.

I know what you’re thinking. This shouldn’t work. But then abusive EULAs shouldn’t work either but some courts seem to accept them. Imma try this.

Posted in Business, Humour, Politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Warmth Stealers

Posted on 16 September 2017 by Larry Russwurm

You might find it oddly satisfying when you get a cat to sit on your lap and it starts purring. Ostensibly you think it is because the cat trusts you and loves to get full body massages. But that is only 2/3 of the story. They are also there to steal your warmth.

You will find that cats prefer your lap much more often in the winter, spring and fall than summer. That is what clued me in on the warmth stealing. They also like to steal the heat from baseboard heaters and even warm lights if they can get close enough (this one is likely to come to an end as more people invest in LED lights and other lighting that produces little heat). But a light has to be on and baseboard heating goes off and on, too, so they still like the lap.

Or the bottom of the lap. Ever notice that when you get up in the cooler months from an insulated couch that a cat has stolen your spot? They are just sopping up the warmth that you left unguarded. So you can either force the cat to move or entice the cat to move. That is if you still want the spot the cat has stolen. This is usually true of a favoured viewpoint to watch the television.

So I present a way to entice your cat out of a favoured location. This method hopefully avoids a confrontation with our cat overlords.

First of all decide on a spot that your cat can curl up in. It must be insulated and comfortable like the spot that you just had stolen from you.

Secondly, sit in the spot for 5 or 10 minutes. It helps if the spot also has a half decent view of the television or is elsewise good enough for the 5 to 10 minutes you will be in it.

Thirdly, you must remove yourself from the spot you don’t want. Warning: this isn’t a very good plan in a 2 cat household. In that eventuality, the second cat is likely to grab this second warm spot. Which means you must soldier on to spot number three and waste another 5 or 10 minutes.

Fourthly, the hope is that your cat moves itself to the new warm spot. Also, if your cat feels too lazy to move this plan can backfire because of that, too.

Finally, you can sit in the favoured spot or you can call your cat a lazy no good bum.

And that is the plan. Use it wisely, grasshoppers.

Posted in Humour, Pets | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

If a Critic Critiqued Science Papers as a Whole

Posted on 9 September 2017 by Larry Russwurm

My suspension of disbelief is thrown off almost immediately with these science papers. They exist in such exotic locales. For example these tall tales exist in: 1)Volcano caves buried under miles of ice on Antarctica, 2) Old mines, many miles under the Earth’s surface, 3) A 27 kilometer ring that collides particles together at near light speed, 4) an observatory on top of the tallest mountain in the world 5) almost any close space locale, 6) the darkest parts of the rain forest, or any other unlikely settings.

These settings stretch our imaginations too much when readers should only be expected to know the ins and outs of the city of New York and their own town or city. And the only reason New York is allowed is because all the publishers have offices in that city.

One thing that is charming about these science papers is the use of the first person ‘I’ or the first group ‘we’. This method of story telling usually has me so engrossed that I get into the story right away. Like the series The Chronicles of Amber by Roger Zelazny it sucks most people in.

The use of the first person to draw you in is more than countered by the motivation of the I or we character(s). There seems to be a care for such minutiae that it pulls me right out of the story again.

Then there are the info dumps. One info dump follows the other to the end of these papers. The info dump is so severe it’s almost as if the reader needed to know everything so they could replicate it in some exotic locale much like the writers of these papers used.

Where is the build to the climax? The conclusion is just reported on. Has no one told these scientists that all good writing follows the simple rule, “show don’t tell”. Well they all break this rule again and again. I can’t blame them, though. The writing is about such esoteric things that even with telling I find I didn’t understand most of what has been said.

So I must leave these papers with a rating of one half a star out of five. “Nyeah!” I say to the people who put me onto this critique, expecting me to give a rating of zero stars. But I have always been a sucker for first person. It’s just too bad they didn’t have an unreliable narrator, because this review would have been a one star out of five.

And I have been told that with unreliable narrators science wouldn’t progress.

Posted in Humour, Science, Writing | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment