The headline is more than a little misleading. “Mad Mike” here isn’t a rocket scientist; in fact, this actual-Flat-Earther states quite clearly that he doesn’t believe in science. Still, he spent a whole lot of money building himself a “skycycle”- like rocket vehicle with which to lob himself into the air.
If you have time to kill and want to chuckle sadly, take a look at this winners Facebook page. He’s not just any Flat Earther, he’s one of those belligerent ones. He thinks that somehow lobbing himself a short distance into the sky will “prove” the Flat Earth delusion to be true… where somehow decades of high altitude balloons, sounding rockets, orbital flights and missions to the moon and beyond somehow all seemed to miss it.
And if there was any lasting doubt that the news media is just not very good, here’s a collection of headlines that will make aerospace engineers – including former rocket engineers like myself – want to pull their hair out:
Not only is there a whole lot of copying off each other – rather than, you know, actual journalismizing – there’s the repeated mis-use of the word “scientist.” Even disregarding the fact that he doesn’t believe in science, there’s the basic fact that he’s not actually *doing* any science.
I’m beginning to become more and more of the opinion that it just might be a good idea to segregate boys from girls in public school, at least up until junior high or high school. That way there’d at least be the potential of teaching kids in ways that are actually appropriate to them, and, much as it’s become popular to believe otherwise, boys and girls *are* inherently different in may important ways.
Take the source (“Prager U”) for what it’s worth, but there re some interesting points raised here:
I’ve long held the view, and expressed it on this blog, that standardized education isn’t for everyone. I don’t believe that society is best off by forcing everyone to stay in the same classes all the way through 12th grade. Some students would simply be better off if they were allowed the leave school some years earlier and be sent into some sort of trade; if nothing else, the *other* students wouldn’t need to be subjected to their bullying, criminality and stupidery. But as the video points out, there are good cases to be made for separating male from female lesson plans. Years ago I wrote about how some of the books I was forced to read in school damn near turned me off reading forever, because they’re just the wrong damned kind of books for me. But I do recall that at the same time I was struggling to give the very slightest of damns about “Sense and Sensibility” and “Little Women” and “I remember Mama” and “Wuthering Heights,” a lot of the girls in the class seemingly couldn’t get enough of it. But did we read Heinlein? Wells? Verne? Sun Tzu? Rand? Lovecraft? Oh, hell no.
Some might argue that it’s important to cram the “classics” into kids in order to “expose them to a wide range of literature blah, blah, blah.” But if the stuff you expose them to is stuff that they’ll *hate,* stuff that they’ll get little to nothing out of, what good are you doing? Chances are good you’re doing *negative* work. Not only are those students getting nothing out of the assignment and thus wasting their time and the teachers, they are also probably so bored that they’re kicking up a fuss that’s ruining the experience for those students who *can* get something out of it. So if there is a simple way to at least get a *crude* semblance of optimization out of the process – like, say, segregating boys from girls and letting boys be aggressive energetic little shits while the girls are, well girls – then huzzah, everybody is better off.
One common refrain is that at some point in the edumacation process, boys become aggressive in class. Not in the beating the tar out of people sense, but in the “Oooh, oooh, call on me, teacher, I know the answer” sense that modern progressives liken to “mansplaining” and “manterrupting,” while girls are less aggressive in that way. Well… fine. Then wouldn’t it be better to separate them? Teach them in the ways that’s best for ’em?
On one hand, it’s always fun to watch the fascists on the far left tear each other apart over matters of ideology. On the other hand, it’s a little disturbing when you consider the unfortunate amount of political power they wield, and how their disdain for due process might well transform society.
So, in this case, we’ve got an actress I’ve never heard of accusing a writer I’ve never heard of of raping her some years ago. But unusually, the writer has a friend in the form of Z-grade actress and political idjit Lena Dunham. Apparently Lena knows the writer well enough to think that the accusations don’t sound right. Unfortunately for Lena, she had the unmitigated gall to actually mention that publicly. So… how’d that work out for her?
In today’s “some white feminists ain’t sh*t” news, Lena Dunham has proven once again that she’s a hot flaming garbage barge of trash, after defending a male writer on her defunct HBO series Girls, when it came to accusations that he raped a 17-year-old actress.
If history has taught anything, it’s that the most vehement hate is directed not at the “other,” but at the heretic. If this situation was clearly something that would stay internal within the members of the regressive left… hey, great, knock yourselves out, kids. But the problem is that it will (and in fact long has) bleed out into the rest of society. Someone makes an accusation? the accused is automatically guilty. Someone defends the accused? That defender is also guilty.
UPDATE: It gets even better. By expressing doubt based on experience, now Lena Dunham is a racist.
I don’t know who the hell most of these people are, but it’s all kinds of entertaining to see them tearing each other apart. They are trying to tear down western civilization, but they seem to be having some trouble keeping it together.
There are certain actors, actresses, actrons and acting units who you know aren’t *really* *good,* as such, but they’re just damned entertaining to watch nonetheless. Dwayne Johnson, aka “The Rock,” is one such… largely because you can tell that he’s generally having a blast doing whatever goofy thing he’s doing.
The forthcoming “Jumanji” movie looks like it’ll be one such entertaining flick. But perhaps even more so, the movie “Rampage,” due out in April and based on the old arcade game and directed by the director of Johnson’s disaster extravaganza “San Andreas,” looks like a hoot and a half. The addition of Neegan to the cast sure can’t hurt either.
I’m a boring man, I admit if. I’d love for someone to (legally) give me a supercar… because I could sell it and pay off my mortgage. The idea of such cars is appealing, but the reality is that you have *lot* of power packed into a small volume that has relatively low mass, meaning that it accelerates *really* fast. Which sounds cool till you realize that you’re not running on rails and that the world is not set up to allow you to drive unimpeded. So… I prefer simpler, more rational cars. Something with good gas mileage, a good safety rating, fair amount of cargo space, a ring mount and good grippy tires is really all I need.
Especially after watching this video of supercars (largely Lambos, if i read them correctly) being driven by fookin morons.
The BBC website has an autoplay video covering a recent “Flat Earth Society” convention in North Carolina. It certainly seems to have been better attended than it should have been. But the perpetual question about flat-Earthers is: how many of them are actual believer, how many of them are there as a lark, how many of them are outright pretending to believe? Flat Earth is such a patently ludicrous notion that it seems like it would be reasonable to suggest that most people who claim to buy into it really don’t. But then you look at the vast spectrum of stupid that humans glom onto with a passion and… yeah, I suppose there really can be that many people who actually think the Earth is a flat disk.
As with most conspiracy theories, I doubt that most true believing Flat Earthers could be logicked or evidenced out of their belief. And the harder you try, the harder they’ll dig in their heels. It provides them a sense of wonder coupled with a sense of “I’m one of the *special* people because I know *The* *Truth.*” Such a feeling cannot be reliably countered with “No, you’re not.”
It’s just an accusation at this time, one Judge Moore has denied. But then, Judge Roy Moore has never really been known for having good judgement; he spent oodles of taxpayer dollars on a clearly unconstitutional endorsement of religion on government grounds. This new development of course throws a wrench into his plans for the special election for the open US Senate seat in Alabama set for December.
2: Also set for December is the release of Ridley Scott’s next movie. A major character in the movie was played by Kevin Spacey, who has suddenly become quite unpopular in Hollywood for being what a whole bunch of people in Hollywod long knew he was. “Was,” because this movie, due to be released in only six weeks, is having all the Spacey scenes reshot with Christopher Plummer in the same role.
If Ridley Scott can pull this off, it’ll be *genius.* For starters, the publicity: having Spacey in the movie might or might not have damaged the box office, but the PR value of pulling off the technical miracle of reshooting and re-editing the movie in a month and a half can only help. Secondly, if Spacey/Plummers scenes are substantial, then this will be an argument that major movies don’t need to take years to accomplish, but months or even just weeks.