A MarketPlace of Ideas                        

Summary:  If a ridiculous Bee implies an impossible See, an impossible See implies your Bee is ridiculous.   Thus Don’t Bee ridiculous. Proof by contradiction is an essential tool of thought that everyone should know.  However it is quite evident to me most people do no know it.  Let me see if I can explain it. Steps: -1- assume an item to be true.  You usually suspect it to be false and use the method to prove it. -2- follow the logical results of this assumption to an absurd conclusion -3- since the logical result is absurd the assumption must be false. You can negate the assumption. Be careful when you do this.  Taking the negative is not as straight forward as many non mathematical people would think. Example:  Prove I am not George Washington.  -1- Assume I am George Washington the first president of the USA -2- my face should match the face on the front of the 1 dollar bill ….does it?  Clearly no. -3- the conclusion my face matches the face on the front of the dollar bill and thus the negative of statement 1 is true = I AM NOT GEORGE WASHINGTON. Sound absurd.  Read the next example and see how the very same method applied to something that sounds more official makes the proof alot simpler than attacking it directly !!   Theorem. There are infinitely many prime numbers. Proof. Assume to the contrary that there are only finitely many prime numbers, and all of them are listed as follows: p₁, p₂ …, p_n. Consider the number q = p₁p₂… p_n + 1. The number q is either prime or composite. If we divided any of the listed primes p_i into q, there would result a remainder of 1 for each i = 1, 2, …, n. Thus, q cannot be composite. We conclude that q is a prime number, not among the primes listed above, contradicting our assumption that all primes are in the list p₁, p₂ …, p_n.

The rabid anti-smoking crowd is upping the anty again.  These Einsteins want employers to be able to firing smokers if they fail to cease smoking.   You can see the article here. Their argument goes something like this:  Smoking is a behavior you can control and thus employers should be able to say quit or your fired.  I would argue that the same thing can be said by an large about HIV AIDS.   Afterall the vast majority of HIV+ people get it from behavoirs they can control like anal sex and shooting up meth with shared needles. What? You do not agree?  Neither to I.  What I just did was proof by contradiction.  In proof by contradiction one assumes a given and then step by step proceed logically until an absurd conclusion is arrived at. Its every bit as absurd to fire people based on their smoking as it is to fire them for being HIV+. The problem here is that it is currently politically stylish to be gay.  It is not politically stylish to be a smoker currently because back in the 80’s when all the anti smoking nonsense started the democrats did not like the fact that cigarette companys donated overwhelmingly to Republicans and not so much to unDemocrats.

I am hereby deracifying the term chimp out.  It applys to all races when upset and angry. Humor factor too high to ignore. Must be used.

Various racist sites on the internet use some hilarious terms that can be used in context of all races.  Thus I hereby for my usage deracify the term sheboon.  Sheboon refers to obese black women with the thunder thighs preferably in skin tight spandex looking like so much Jimmy Dean Pure Pork Sausage. There are all too many large women in the USA and sheboon is just too funny for me to ignore further.

Since the supreme court has ruled we must give rights to enemy combatants there is only one solution.  Take no prisoners.  Shoot to kill.

The Norwegians count themselves superior to Americans in all aspects.  They consider themselves in a state of wonderful socialist equality.  They also fancy themselves ecologically marvelous.  I have first hand experienced their attitude of ecological superiority towards the USA.  They say "you guys use so much oil. Shame shame.  We do not do that in Norway".  However they do drill for and sell the stuff.  If oil is like crack cocaine they consider themselves superior because they only sell it ….they do not use it!   Of course a weak argument.  A guy from portugal who was there at this event said "If you seriously think global warming is being caused by oil you should stop selling it!"   For gods sake EVEN the Norwegians drill in the ocean! …..that is why this nation of only 4 million people has alot of money to sling around and play pretend games about how socialism makes their country so equal……….which I find hysterical. Its like one of the super hot info-babes on one of the news channels telling you they got their job because of their journalistic talents !   …..never mind that fact merely looking at them has us on the edge of orgasm. But I guarantee you should not worry about Norway stopping the sales of oil.  They won’t.  My experience with Norwegian is that they are cheap and will go to great lengths to save a kroner.  I have personally seen this on multiple occassions.  So amid all their ecological superiority they have no intention of: -1- stopping drilling in the ocean -2- stop selling oil What I find hysterically funny is we in the USA do not drill in coastal waters for fear of something.  Maybe its the states ways of insuring they get a cut of the oil revenues. What ever the reason we as Americans are fools for not doing this years ago.  Alot of people say efficiency will help but simply put you can not expect us to be Europe.  Even if you stipulate the USA using 50% of current values when you factor in China and India we will still need to drill.   Efficiency is clearly in the works regardless of what else happens.  We need to drill drill DRILL.  We are already risking economic collapse because of this effeminate ban on coastal drilling.  Our balance of trade is weakening the dollar badly now.  The quickest way to fix this is to take the oil component out of the trade numbers.  On this topic I am absolutely sure we will be drilling within 5 years time regardless who is elected.  The people will rip heads off until it happens. In the mean time we will still need alternative energy sources.  But that is coming on its own schedule.   Meanwhile we need to prevent too many people starving.