Thursday, 25 February 2010

"Dear Scientology, from Science" (No. 13)

Number 13! Unlucky for some, if you believe in that sort of thing. Which I don't of course. And just to prove that I don't, I'm going to respond to some requests and dedicate this letter to a group which is more likely than most to track me down and hack my feet off in my sleep.

(If you're new here, welcome! The previous letters to the Media, Homeopathy, Astrology, Economics, Apple, Advertising, The Pope, Antivaxxers, Teaspoons, Alternative Medicine, Women and the BRAH are there for the perusing, if you have the inclination to view them)

"Dear Scientology


You probably don't know me, but I'm the anthropomorphic personification of Science. Are you at least familiar with my work? I made aeroplanes and penicillin, and lasers, and stuff like that. Basically, if it doesn't occur naturally, I did it. And sometimes even if it does, but needs to be discovered and extracted. And even that definition will change, as soon as I can get enough approval for my GM crops. I don't understand why people are so opposed to it. Imagine, tomatoes the size of beach-balls, self peeling bananas, it would be great! Granted, can't rule out the possibility that they'll become self aware and turn against us (the 'Triffid' effect, think Skynet, but with pips).

Where was I again?

Oh yeah. Basically, I'm Science. And you're not. But you seem to be trading on my name. To be honest, I'd rather you didn't. I was told about you recently, and I really had to look you up. I can't say I'm pleased by what I found out.

Originally, going by what I was told, I assumed you were some sort of quazi-philosophical study of science, i.e. me. Any -ology, to me, is the study of something. That was quite an unnerving prospect. I have no objection to being studied (if I did it would be literally the biggest example of hypocrisy in recorded history), but I would worry that you've not told me your studying me. Prolonged study of someone without them knowing is more commonly regarded as 'stalking'. A crime in most places, and I'm not popular or sexy enough to make it OK.
(Admittedly, a lot of anthropologists would probably take issue with this argument. I would clarify my position, but seeing as my first assumption as to what you were about was utterly wrong, it seems meaningless)

Someone then told me that you were actually a Religion. Not a cult, apparently, you hate being described as a cult. I can't really see the issue there, it's like insisting you're a chiropractor, NOT an osteopath; either way, you're just being extremely pedantic about what sort of idiot you are.

But a religion with a name like yours led me to believe that you'd be a religion dedicated to science, which (as previously stated) is me. Although I would be flattered by the attention, I would have to thoroughly advise against such a thing, as it would be missing the point entirely. A religion about science? That's like trying to analyse the soul by dissecting the Pope, and that could never happen (the cardinals threw my anatomists out of the state chamber before they could get through his diaphragm).

But after some thorough research, I have discovered that you aren't a religion dedicated to me at all. You are in fact, founded on the writings of a sub-standard novelist who wrote rather crap science-fiction. I can tell it's crap because, unlike with the good stuff, I wasn't consulted on any of it. I usually get to at least proof-read it if the author has any credibility (Philip K Dick used to send me his manuscripts, but after reading his stuff I used to get a terrible migraine and have to lie down in a dark room, so I just let him get on with it in the end. And Dan Brown is actually a spambot that just got wildly out of hand).

What do you understand by the words 'science' and 'fiction'? From what I can tell, you've named yourself after the former but dedicated yourself to the latter. Why not go with 'Fictology'? Why drag me into it, against my will and with no justification for doing so? I've heard you get a lot of your teachings from 'Battlefield Earth'? I hope this isn't true, as that book is utter crap. About 2000 pages filled with poorly written childish bilge. It's ridiculous, basing an entire religion on a long winded, wildly unrealistic book written by someone who's been dead for some time. Like that sort of thing will ever work!

Honestly, for something with a name so similar to mine, you appear to have an alarming absence of awareness of what I'm about. Psychiatry is 'evil', but 'Auditing' is good for you? Making someone tell you their most painful secrets doesn't necessarily make them feel better about them. If anything, you've caused them to relive the painful memory, making it worse, and this is compounded by the fact that an insane cultist knows about it too. (Yes, I said cult this time, be grateful that I was willing to concede that much, it's perilously close to a very similar sounding term that I feel is more appropriate). And if you do think running a current through someone in order to make them feel better is a valid approach, you might want to up the voltage.

I also notice that your stronghold is in Hollywood, the mecca of brainlessness, fiction and the easily deluded. Makes sense I suppose. Have you thought about suing the antivaxxers? They stole your idea of using unhinged celebrities as chief spokespeople. You really should press charges, it'll be very useful to me to have you two fight to the death (and probably quite hilarious). You shouldn't worry about losing, your grip on reality is even more tenuous than theirs, and even if the worst happens your 'thetan' will endure (or soul, or whatever you call it, a unicorn by any other name still wouldn't exist).

I also looked up 'Dianetics'. Seems like a re-hash of some of Freud's ideas. If you are going to appropriate the ideas of some of my more infamous people, you don't have to go with the coke-addled loony with the self-confessed 'issues' regarding his mother. Why not try Galileo, or Kepler? They were more reasonable people, and studied space and stuff. You like that, don't you? You think you're space aliens? You might as well, makes as much sense as anything else.

So to summarize, you're a wannabe religion that's obsessed with money, power and control, that specialises in brainwashing people to conform to your ideals and is based on the ravings of some lunatic who wrote a giant book?

You want to watch yourself mate, you'll be given a most thorough ass-kicking imaginable. And that's not a threat, it's a warning. Nothing to do with me, but Catholicism is a jealous bugger, and he'll take you to the cleaners if you get too cocky.

Either way, cut your nonsense! You've combined the worst aspects of cults, religions, alternative medicine and celebrities, and that can't be good thing. If you had physical form, it would look like a huge Frankenstein's monster put together from bits of serial killers and televangelists that goes around mugging the villagers.

But what do I know, right? I'm just the personification of all human knowledge.

Love and kisses

Science (BA hons)

P.S. I do have many, many more things I can complain about regarding what you do and believe, but I'd be here forever if I tried to write them all down. I'd have to put them together in some massive and pointless book, and knowing you you'd only go an found a religion on it. Psycho."

Email: humourology (at)
Twitter: @garwboy

Monday, 22 February 2010

"Dear British Association of Homeopathic Retailers, from Science' (No. 12)

You never see scientists gloating do you? Not even when it's completely justified.

(For original letter to Homeopathy, go here. That one was very popular. Not saying it led to the article linked above, but until I see all the evidence....)

"Dear British Association of Homeopathic Retailers



Welcome to big school. Not what you expected? No, it never is. But you wanted to be taken seriously, and this is what happens when you shout your mouth off without the capacity to back it up.

And before you start barking on about the 'good evidence that homeopathy works', bear in mind that the most convincing evidence in the world is useless if, as in this case, nobody get's to see it. I'm not ignoring the evidence, it's logically impossible to ignore something that isn't there. And as for balanced arguments, I'd be happy to take on board every rational argument you can supply. Assuming, of course, that you extend to me the same courtesy? Yeah, thought not. So just shut up and take your medicine (the real kind that actually works)

I look forward to your insane responses.

Great big childish raspberries to you

Science (BA hons)

P.S. You might want to warn all the other 'alternative' organisations. I will be coming for you all eventually, and they won;t like that at all. Not going into details, but did you see Terminator 2?...

email: humourology (at)
twitter: @garwboy

Monday, 15 February 2010

"Dear Women, from Science" (No. 11)

I sincerely hope people actually read the following before deciding that I need castrating for being a sexist pig or what have you.

"Dear Women,

This is the anthropomorphic personification of Science, with an open letter to all women everywhere.


Please forgive my using the bare minimum of polite small talk, even in a letter, but I'm afraid time is of the essence and I can't afford delays. The fact of the matter is that, despite my best efforts, recent budget problems (thanks to economy, that git) coupled with my attention being taken up by homeopaths, chiropractors, antivaxxers and the rest (it's like having fleas, being constantly besieged by armies of mindless parasites who want my blood but have no understanding as to why), it appears I've been caught off guard, and a serious problem may be imminent.
I'll be blunt. There is another potential pandemic in the making. I just managed to spot swine-flu in time to give everyone the heads up, although it still may end up being devastating (thanks again to the antivaxxers, why don't they just pour cyanide in the reservoirs and speed up the process? As long as it doesn't cause autism, right?). However, there is another virus which appears to have completely passed me by, and from what little evidence I have been able to gather, if it does get any more virulent it could wipe out mankind. I am writing to all women because, by some quirk of biology or serendipity, you appear to be able to accurately identify and diagnose this virus without training or expertise.

I have classed it as influenza masculinus, but it is more commonly known as 'man flu'. I have no idea how a species-specific gender-specific virus of such potency could become so widespread in the population while completely escaping my notice. But sadly, that appears to be the case. And in case you doubt my credentials in this area, bear in mind it was me who discovered the atom. It was down the back of the sofa (amongst other places). So my observational skills are unsurpassed. I even devised to observer effect!

The worrying aspect is that the majority of woman claiming to have witnessed a victim of influenza masculinus appear to treat the sufferer with a degree of contempt, amusement and ridicule, which is behaviour uncommon in women (or so my expert behavioural analysts tell me, although they're largely unattractive bloated men, so are probably working from theories alone). This is without doubt the worst possible course of action/behaviour. Until my people are able to isolate the virus and develop a treatment, please treat all likely cases with extreme caution.

Although there have been no confirmed cases as yet of influenza masculinus transferring between genders, I cannot stress enough how potentially dangerous such an occurrence would be. All of my available data suggests that it would be extremely virulent, and the more vindictive females would have to find new targets for ridicule, as mocking a disease sufferer while suffering from the same illness would be illogical, and I can't imagine an illogical woman! (admittedly, I'm not known for my powers of imagination).

If this does not convince you, consider logic. The male victim is often mocked for his inability to function normally while suffering from the infection, and is ridiculed for his perceived lack of stamina in comparison to the typical female. However, male bravado in the face of physical discomfort is a far more prevalent behaviour, however unnecessary it may be. Males are often seen to be engaging in activities which are highly likely to cause significant physical distress (e.g. contact sports, heavy drinking, drug abuse, sexual intercourse with Paris Hilton etc.). The fact that they succumb to this virus should be deeply troubling.

Biologically, there is also cause for alarm. It is undeniable that males have evolved to be more resilient to damage and physical harm, so a virus that could so effectively undermine the male system must be potent indeed. By my calculations, should a woman be infected with influenza masculinus, she will be instantly killed. The manner of death depends on the effect on the metabolism the virus has, but I've narrowed it down to instantly liquefying (i.e. Ebola, only much, much worse) or spontaneous combustion. Either way, it'll be messy.
The fact that no woman has ever been reported to be infected with 'man flu' is something I have to attribute to an evolved trait of the virus; it would be detrimental to the virus to thoroughly obliterate its host before it has a chance to spread, so it has evolved to avoid the more fragile hosts (and then, as previously stated, no women who was infected with the standard virus would last long enough to report it or be diagnosed). But it could only be a matter of time before a mutated (weaker) form of the virus starts killing females, so I must ask for your assistance, for your sake as well as mine. There is also the possibility of the virus becoming more potent among men, which could eventually wipe out most of the men on Earth. And before you open the champagne to celebrate your feminist utopia, are you so sure a world of women would be a positive thing? Two words; Heat Magazine.

Please, avoid contact with all sufferers of man flu. Seeing as you're only going to ridicule them anyway, you've not really lost anything (I believe the refusal of males to seek medical help coupled with the dismissive attitude of women is what caused this lack of awareness on my part). And pass on a message to any men you believe to be suffering with the illness, tell them to report to me (or more accurately, my doctors) as I need all the data I can get if I'm going to fight this thing.

I have also investigated the possibility of influenza femininus (woman flu). There is some evidence to suggest that it exists and that men can catch it, but they don't show any serious symptoms. According to anecdotal evidence, men suffering woman flu can display a range of symptoms, such as 'mild hangover', 'nothing at all' to 'bellowing laughter while ripping a phone-book in half'. Still, I'll look into it.

Be alert ladies, I'm counting on you to save the world (possibly)

love and kisses

Science (BA hons)"

Now you can kick me in the nuts (should our paths cross)

Email: humourology (at)
Twitter: @garwboy

Thursday, 11 February 2010

"Dear Alternative Medicine, from Science" (No. 10)

This is recycled from an old blog, but seems more pertinent now so I've adapted it into a letter. Sort of a conciliatory gesture for the insanity involving spoons. I shouldn't adopt the persona of science post-wine, is what we learn from that.

Also, all contributions to the list welcome (read letter, then you'll understand). It won't stop the Alternative medicine brigade, but it might help pre-empt them somewhat.

"Dear Alternative Medicine
Hello, it's me, Science. Remember me? You should do, you've sued me often enough. Just further proof that Law is a whore (hey, that rhymes!). Just thought I'd drop you a line to let you know I'm thinking about you.
I plan to write to each individual aspect of you eventually. I would do it face-to-face, but that's not an option as you've banned me from all your meetings and gatherings. Also, us abstract concepts don't have faces per se, but I can't be certain you believe otherwise. It's not the stupidest thing you've put faith in thus far, admittedly.
As previously mentioned, your main response to me when I cast doubt on your wild, unverified claims is to sue. Seems easier than providing evidence, but then it doesn't really disprove my point. I've learned that your most devout adherents would scream in the face of reason until foaming at the mouth rather than doubt your claims, so I tend not to talk to them.
But don't think I don't learn from our interactions. That's pretty much exactly what my purpose is. Your purpose seems to be to come up with some vaguely plausible sounding theories, claim to able to use them to manipulate health by some bizarre mechanism, then charge obscene amounts for your special 'skills'. Often, you'll add a few big words so you'll sound like me and exploit my credibility. I haven't sued yet, but don't rule it out.
So, in order to limit any further spread of your influence, here are several alternative therapies that I've 'discovered'. If I catch any of your lot using them at any point, then I will sue you into oblivion. That'll make a nice change, won't it.

It's well established that the arrangement of your surroundings can make you feel good, and imbue a sense of wellness. Well, imagine how much better you would feel if your internal environment was correctly arranged? Modern life and the intrusions of modern medicine have enforced a disharmonious arrangement on our internal organs, but a brand new therapy now allows you to place your vital organs into a healthy, harmonious configuration. Think how much better does it feel when you re-arrange your external organs manually.
Sadly, the genitals are the only external organs available for manipulation to the untrained, but a number of techniques are available, all administered by a certified Nonsensica (tm) organ manipulator for a variety of bargain prices, all guaranteed to make you feel at least 67% more well and harmonious once the immediate pain and soreness that results from forced organ adjustment has worn off. These include
Kidney Synchronosis - £25
Liver Morphotosis - £45
Spinal Space contrarotation - £60
Brain-Skull repositioning - £100
Heart cavity Resetting - £150
Colonoscopic refinement - £3000
And many others. Book now to ensure you exist in a well balanced environment, inside and out.

It is well established that water retains a memory for all the active components that have been dissolved in it. But the water on this planet has been around for millions of years, so who could possibly know what has been in it at any point? Homeopathy can only go so far, but brand new techniques, pioneered by Nonsensica (tm), actually break down the structure of water itself through advanced 'electrolysis'. Water is reset to its original, primordial state.
All ill health in modern society can be traced to the consumption of contaminated water, so by purchasing your water from Nonsensica (tm) you can be among the healthiest people on Earth, providing you avoid all contact with non-reset water. From just £49.99 litre, re-set water prevents ill health, cures illness, and the special electrolysed reset water (£79.99 a litre) even contains residual electricity, giving you a spring in your step and more energised blood to aide respiration.

Everyone knows that food grown in volcanic soil is better than standard food. And people who live on or around volcanoes live longer lives (barring eruptions). Clearly, the energies of mother Earth itself are infused into their diet, and now they can be for yours too. At just £9.99 a sachet, you can now add the minerals and nutrients of materials that are 100% guaranteed to have been part of a high energy natural process to your food and drink (but not soft drinks, the poisonous caustic properties of these tend to denature the active elements).
Simply purchase your £9.99 sachets from Nonsensica (tm), or £18.99 for the extra dense materials which provide even more energy and goodness to your system, and add them to your meals. Obviously, the raw energies of the Earth are too much for some people, so you may not feel benefits straight away, but any ill effects are purely due to your body adapting to the new powers it is being exposed to. Embrace the Earth, it's the best idea you'll ever have!

Autoelevatory therapy
"On top of the World". "As high as a kite". "Up, up and away". All positive sayings. And have you ever noticed the top athletes train at high altitudes in order to achieve the best performance? What do all these things have in common? That's right, Height!
Humans evolved from tree dwelling creatures and mountain dwelling life forms. Since we crawled out of the primordial seas, we've always aspired to get higher and higher. Clearly, our bodies crave to be higher than all others. This is why tall people are so much happier than short ones and midgets.
Our social and physical ills can be traced to a lack of height in our daily lives, but help is now available. Nonsensica (tm) now offer specially designed autoelevator slip-ins for your shoes. These painstakingly designed elevators (£59.99 each) fit snugly into your everyday shoes and mould to the natural shape of your feet, but raise your average height by crucial inches in a manner utterly dissimilar to that of high-heels or platform shoes. Unless your ideal body height is greater than that provided by the autoelevators, you will feel a noticeable sense of well being and health that can only come from being 'high'.

So yeah. Those are mine now. You can't have them.

You're cynically

Science (BA hons)

(Also, for the rational people, here's what you get for the money.
Organ-Shui = A rather aggressive, inexpert massage.
Neo-Homeopathy = Distilled water, with a dash of lemon juice. 2 dashes for the electrolysed type.
Nutrivulcanism = Wood ash, with added grit for the denser sachets.
Autoelevatory therapy. = Two large lumps of wax, the kind they use for ear plugs).

Please add more if you can think of them.

Email: humourology (at)
Twitter: @garwboy

Wednesday, 10 February 2010

"Dear Teaspoons, from Science" (No. 9)

You ever just let your mind wander?...

"Dear Teaspoons

Hello! It's me, Science! The anthropomorphic personification of science to be precise. Some people might think it's weird for an abstract concept to write a letter to the massed collective of a specific type of inanimate object, but it's more common than you might think. Or 'they' might think, you probably don't think, what with being a bunch of spoons. Or do you? I'll come to that later.
There was that time that 'Compassion' sent an angry letter to all the plant pots in the world, something to do with stifling growth. I didn't really listen to be honest, it all sounded like new age crap to me. And there was that time that Whimsy wrote to the totality of bulldozers, complaining about the damage they do to natural habitats (I'm pretty sure badgers were mentioned, they usually are when whimsy is involved). Long story short, what I'm doing is based on established principles. It usually is with me, except when it isn't.
Normally I'd give you some background as to what I'm on about before revealing the actual point/complaint, but I can't see the point in spending too much time with the preamble when addressing a bunch of kitchen utensils. I'm sure that would meet the criteria for insanity. Actually, I'm certain, seeing as it's usually me who establishes these criteria. Ergo, if I think I meet the standards for insanity, then I automatically do.
I bet homeopaths never have this trouble, seeing as nobody trusts them to open a jar of homeopathic olives (which is a jar of brine that did admittedly have an olive in it once during the early 14th century)
Anyway, I'll get to the point.

How would like to be classed as a subatomic particle?

Now don't answer immediately (not something I'm worried about, but still...). I know there are several problems with that offer. Mainly, you're not subatomic, not by even the most generous margins. It's clear to see that you are clear to see, so at best would be described as a 'superatomic' particle. Macroscopic, in other words.
Don't worry about that, my classification systems aren't nearly as rigid and focused as everyone believes. Just look at the biological classifications; I'm still baffled as to what exactly jellyfish are, so you'll be in good company.

But you have other properties I'm interested in, which could easily clinch your official status as an exotic particle. For one, you have your own version of the uncertainty principle. What I mean is, everyone who has teaspoons knows where they are kept, but can never definitively say how many they have. Location but not number, and anyoe who knows exactly how many spoons they have can invariably not find them all, like atoms and the like. Well done with that.

Also, you keep getting to the washing up, even if you've not been used. Some form of teleportation? Nice one if so. Of course, it doesn't work with every location, just in the kitchen sink. This suggests some form of ansible link. Do you become quantum-entangled with the sink? Makes a certain amount of sense. Apart form being interesting in it's own right, this suggests incredible commercial and practical use. Would you consent to have one of your number taken to, say, Mars? I'll arrange to have a NASA technician doing the washing up in Houston when it gets there, I'll bet it reappears in the sink instantaneously. Wormholes, faster-than-light communication, properly stirred tea, you have a lot to offer if you come work for me.

Of course, if you are capable of communication across great distances like this, then it's feasible that all teaspoons are in fact interlinked. Rapid communication between elements of such a widespread, complex arrangement of units that have numerous states would result in phenomenal processing power. There's me saying you're just a bunch of inert tools, when you may in fact be an incredibly advanced artificial network, most likely possessing an intelligence greater than that of mankind. I'd advise against attempts to enslave them though, they don't like that. And that Jon Connor is a stubborn git, and so is his mum.

Again, this assumption that you have many different components may also be flawed. With the exception of some different handles mounted around the metal 'core', all teaspoons look identical, and I've never actually heard anyone say that they've made a teaspoon. Does anyone? I have to admit that it is possible that all teaspoons are one and the same spoon, which emerged from the fury of the big bang, travelled to the end of the universe then, with it's quantum abilities, reverted to the beginning again to take a new path, and on an on until the entire universe is filed with teaspoons.

Remember that film where they said 'there is no spoon'? That may be the most incorrect statement ever.

This is all speculation of course, I won't know until we run some tests. Would you be cool with it if I put a few teaspoons in the Large Hadron Collider? Then we'll see what's what. It's mutually beneficial, you get to be the first utensil to travel at relativistic speeds, I get to save a fortune on all those detectors I need to analyse individual particles. Seriously, if you help out I could do the whole thing with a mobile phone camera.

The offers there, let me know what you think.

Love and kisses

Science (BA hons)

P.S. Whether I'm write or wrong about this, I'll still be using you to stir tea. You gotta do what you gotta do

email: humourology (at)
twitter: @garwboy

Science Commentary: Predator 2

I think I'm channelling my 'Science' character in my daily life now. Wife was away last night, I was on my own. Lacking anything better to do, I decided to watch Predator 2. Bought it impulsively months ago, finally decided to sit down and watch it for Nostalgic reasons.

Decided, for no real reason, to do a science 'commentary' on Predator 2 via twitter. Here's the results.

It's a laugh, at the end of the day


Watching Predator 2. Savage but high-tech alien slaughters laughable racial stereotypes. What fun!

If it's this easy for illegal immigrants to obtain military grade hardware, I can see why some people are so worried about them.

Actually, hideously over-powered 'aliens' appears to be a running theme with this film.

Do Jamaicans even practice Voodoo? First I've heard of it.

Did Bill Paxton have some sort of 'must play a prick' clause in his contract in the 80's/90's?

Ha ha ha, old computers trying to look like futuristic computers is always funny. Noble effort though.

Thinking about it, there's no proof that the Predator is Male. Many secies on Earth, the female is the hunter. And it has long hair...

When does Danny Glover say he's 'too old for this shit'? What's the cut off age for fighting advanced giant interstellar hunters?

Yay! Stereotypical scientist just determined the atomic structure of a metal in 3 seconds. Using a microscope.

Strange. Voodoo Jamaican drug boss with a somewhat African accent. Or am I missing some subtle nuance?

Good point, dreadlocks would make a severed head easier to carry. Not sure that's what they're for though.

What? A skull from a creature from the 'Alien' franchise? A species with an exoskeleton that has a bone skull? Why?

The colour and therefore molecular structure of bone is conserved across the galaxy, it seems.

A suit that bends light around it. Don't we have sunblock that can do that now?

Predator uses hi-tech weapons and combat skills to take out drug rings & criminals. Were he a white human billionaire, he'd be a superhero.

Exactly how do you determine what spectrum an unknown extraterrestrial perceives light in with such confidence?

Predator eats frozen beef. Doubly impressive for a being with no visible jawbone.

I think those are the same helmet/camera kits they used in 'Aliens'. Paxton must have brought them with him.

The alien uses infrared, so they remove all sources of heat from they're bodies and see with high powered UV lamps. Um...

Neon green blood should be a disadvantage for a species evolved for stealth combat, but if the rest of the planet sees in infrared too...

Glover's just chopped Predator's arm off and let him fall from a great height. Forgot to claim to be his father, though.

Would melted ceramics really be viable as a cauterising agent?

I'd love a super-sharp mechanical frisbee. Not sure my dog would feel the same, though.

e-mail: Humourology (at)
Twitter: @garwboy

Friday, 5 February 2010

Storm: The Movie (Shout out No.1)

A bit of a shout out to the work of others, which is far in advance of my own, while I seem to have been granted the attention of an army of rational thinkers and sceptics.

(Now that I think of it, would a sceptic army be a good thing? They'd be very well organised and thoroughly trained, but it would take years to convince them that they should to go to war)

You familiar with Tim Minchin? If you are, good, that's to be expected. If you aren't, go to the link and don't come back until you are. If you are familiar but don't like his work, you have the wrong blog, I think you want this one.

Having seen the man himself live twice, and even met him in a bar during the Edinburgh festival (for 'met', read 'passed him as he was on his way to buy a drink like some sort of normal person but had too much pride to make an unsolicited introduction like a simpering fanboy even though it did cross my mind to do so'), I can vouch for his genius.

Who else could write a 9 minute beat poem based around an argument with a self-righteous homeopathy-swallowing arrogant airhead and make it entertaining?

Well, now it's going to be even more entertaining as they're making it into a video, or 'movie' if you prefer, I'm not sure what the difference is.

Check it out

You can keep up with the progress of it here. It's written, and the movie is being coordinated by Tracy King, Queen Bee* of the scepchicks, so big props to her.

(* = Metaphorically speaking, I'm sure Tracy isn't 10 times the size of your normal person with a massive swollen abdomen from which she produces countless larval sceptics every waking moment. However, given the nature of this blog and her pursuits, I should admit I haven't met her so can't completely rule it out)

email: humourology (at)
Twitter: @garwboy

Thursday, 4 February 2010

Another video post

For those of you who can't stand my 'relaxed' attitude to grammar and correct wording, and my seeming obsession with ''''''''apostrophes''''''''', here's some of my irrelevant thoughts/musings in video form.

"Dear Antivaxxers, from Science" (No. 8)

Needs doing, might as well kick them when they're down.

(N.B. Some anti-vaccination protesters may indeed be otherwise pleasant, rational people undeserving of scorn or ridicule, but I'm not going to start making detailed exceptions. Some people have complained to me that this sort of generalisation is unfair and non-scientific so I shouldn't do it, completely missing the point that that's why I do this. Science being non-scientific is pretty much the theme of this series. If anyone else feels slighted or upset by the generalisations I've made, that you feel unfairly cast you or your chosen profession/beliefs in a negative light then send me a self-addressed jiffy bag and I'll return it full of good feelings, to replace the ones I've hurt)

"Dear Antivaxxers
Hello, how are you? This might end up being a bit confusing, as I'm the personification of the abstract concept of Science, and as such don't really exist, whereas when I say 'antivaxxers' I'm referring to the sum of individuals who collectively oppose the use of vaccination on the spurious and completely contradictory grounds that they're damaging to health.
I'm pretty sure you aren't part of one international organisation, but I'm lumping you together anyway. Aside from that detail, you do exist in a physical form, whereas I don't, so this letter might be weird for you, especially as it contains actual words and information.

It must be as if Santa Claus wrote to you first. In July. And you hate Santa Claus because he endangers your children (not like the traditional Santa Claus, a perfectly harmless symbol of goodness and generosity that teaches children to appreciate it when a fat sweaty old man in disguise breaks into their room at night bearing gifts, and to be really quiet about it when he does). But I digress.

Believe it or not, this is actually a thank you note. I wanted to say I appreciate it, all the things you've done to help me over that past decade. Not only have you helped me cut my research costs, but you've also opened up new fields of research for me that will no doubt prove very lucrative once I've made some headway, and in these troubling financial times that's nothing to be sniffed at.

For instance, I've managed to trim my research and associated costs by nearly 50% thanks to your shining example. Rather than have my people spend countless hours in labs and clinics, endlessly churning out data and results that might not even give the findings they want, before tediously writing them up then having numerous experts check their findings so that they can ensure the conclusions are appropriate, I've assigned most of them to adopt your approach.

Hysterical nonsensical screaming. Seriously, rather than do all that work to prove their theories about health, I've just got them going out into their street and yelling at passers by, about how if people ignore their theories then the children will be in danger (although with some of the physicists this is coming across as more of a threat, will work on that).

I've even got the paediatricians doing it. I did think that having people responsible for children's health wasting their time by shouting about children's health rather than doing things which were known to improve children's health would be detrimental to children's health, but I just followed your example; keep saying 'children's health' enough and it makes it OK.

Took me by surprise, but I have to admit it gets things done. I've seen a noticeable drop in reports about sick children, which may or may not be related to the fact that I've not bothered taking reports or analysing data for a while, it just gets in the way of all the shouting.

And another nice call on the spokespeople. I've been relying on trained and qualified people to convey facts and information about their chosen field, and it's never worked. If only I'd thought to get some middle-aged female celebrities to tell people what's what. The beauty of it is, they don't even need to be trained! They can talk about anything and people will believe them because media says they should. How ingenious. I only wish I'd gotten hold of some big celebrity spokespeople before Scientology snapped them all up (I'm also thinking of suing Scientology for copyright infringement, but that's another matter)

Either way, I now know in future to use only angry women as spokespeople, seeing as how they interpret every criticism and argument against them as wishing death upon their children, or potential children, giving them the upper hand in every debate even if they're stark raving mad. Maternal anger seems to trump reason and logic every time, I'll bear that in mind.

Also, as I said, thanks for opening new fields of research for me. For instance, I now know that 'harmless' low level or even inert doses of viruses injected from a young age are inherently dangerous, more so than exposure to the full strength virus which a non-vaccinated person is far more likely to succumb to. What an intriguing concept, the fact that tiny doses of measles/mumps/rubella can cause autism but the full-strength viruses don't. Inverse efficacy? I can't explain it. But I agree, can't be having children getting autism, much better they die of an easily preventable disease. Think of the children!

Unless you're one of those people like I implied Santa Claus, in which case do anything but think of the children.

And well done on exposing Big Pharma. That brute needs taking down a peg, admittedly. I mean, I thought I understood how business worked. I was wrong (you may be unfamiliar with this phrase, but just look it up). You revealed that Big Pharma is selling harmful/ineffective vaccines purely for profit. I would have thought that it would have been a major marketing mistake for a business to maim/kill potential customers, but I guess I was wrong. Toyota seem to agree. If I can work out how this is the case, I could make some serious money from it. Killing customers is a valid marketing strategy? I can't wait to ride the Disneyland Decapitator (The Decappiest place on Earth!), or enjoy a delicious McDonalds Cyanide burger. Mmm, lethalicious! I'm lovin' it! (For about 6 seconds)

So yeah, thanks for everything you've done, I appreciate it.

Love and Kisses

Science (BA hons)

P.S. You might want to watch where you tread, I dropped a vial of smallpox the other day, can't seem to find it. I'm sure it'll be fine, though

email: humourology (at)
Twitter: @garwboy

Wednesday, 3 February 2010

Bad Astronomy

As mentioned in previous post, this humble blog got bigged up in Bad Astronomy today

Here's the page

No reason for that link, apart from giving my regular readers (many of whom are German, for some reason*) an idea as to why there's been a lot more traffic to this site, if they'd picked up on it. It just links back to here anyway, but that means that with a bit of luck we might be able to trap some spambots in an infinite loop.

Back with more letters soon


* = I mean, I don't know the reason why my blog has proven particularly popular with German people, the reason they ARE German is most likely due to being born and/or living in Germany

Email: Humourology (at)
Twitter: @garwboy

The Science Letters: Feedback (No.1)


This is me writing now, not 'Science'. After a recent shout out via Bad Astronomy, I've noticed an increase in readers orders of magnitude beyond what I usually get. Hello all.

As a result, several points have been raised, which I will try to address now.

Admittedly, I do use apostrophes quite excessively. Just a bit of a blind spot, I suppose. Not sure if this is a genuine attempt by people to get me to raise my standards (if so, cheers!) or if I've got a case of the mythological grammar Nazis. Just a note to point out that Science and grammar don't necessarily go hand-in-hand, they differ on many things. The meaning of the word 'colon', for example...

This has been raised previously, and I'll reiterate it here. Yes, I do write from the point of view that Science is male, despite the Latin feminine nouns. And before any militant feminists scream about arrogance, I do this purely because I am male, and no other reason. I also assign genders to other concepts according purely to what makes the letter read better, and may easily change my mind in later pieces. I wouldn't want to do it any other way, as whereas I am confident enough to write as if I were the living embodiment of the totality of science (encompassing all of mankinds information, study and research into the universe past, present and future), I would never be presumptuous enough to write as a woman. I know my limits.

I'm aware that the Dear Astrology letter contains several 'mistakes' regarding astrology, in so far as you can make mistakes regarding a completely created system. I know Pluto is still there, but do astrologers? I'm trying to rail against things based on the perception of them in modern culture, as people always do with science. Meticulously researching the thing I'm addressing and making sure to avoid inaccuracies would sort of defeat the point of what I'm doing. That's what scientists always do, I want to show what it could be like if science behaved in a similar manner to it's detractors. Bare in mind, I've had an extensive reply from an astrologer, doesn't look like logic is their strong suit.

I do tend to do a lot of generalising, this isn't necessarily accurate when applied to things that aren't pseudoscience. This is purely for ease of writing/reading. Not all journalists/media platforms are idiotic trash dispensers, not all advertisers are soulless bullshit merchants, not all Apple products are pretentious. I could be more specific in my ill-informed rants, but that would lose the impact somewhat. Don't take it personal, unless you actually are a homeopath or the Pope, in which case I apologise for nothing.

Yes, I put BA hons whenever I sign off as 'science'. This is meant to be a joke, obviously. I just find it very amusing, the irony of the living embodiment of science actually having an arts degree. Maybe it's just me?

Think that's about it for now. Have I missed anything? Just comment or message if so. Will see if I can sustain people's interest into next week.

email: Humourology (at)
Twitter: @garwboy

Tuesday, 2 February 2010

"Dear 'The Pope', from Science" (No. 7)

Had to be done, really

Dear 'The Pope'

Is that accurate, calling you 'The Pope'? I think the word is Pontiff, but whenever I try to write that I keep saying 'Pointless', which I know would upset you, as you don't usually like it when I say things which are accurate.
It's me, the anthropomorphic personification of Science. I doubt you'll read this, you've never read any of my previous works. Even though we both have a tendency to use big Latin words in order to confuse people, I don't think we share similar reading preferences. My books tend to include figures and graphs, not so much stonings and miracles.

Also, I know I never said thanks for agreeing that the Big Bang theory is accurate, but having you agree with me actually undermines my argument more than anything, so would you mind just not getting involved from now on?
Actually, that was the last one wasn't it? Or was it several Popes ago? It's hard to keep track of you guys. Are you a Time Lord? Or is it one of those 'Dead Man's Shoes' situations? Or 'Dead Man's sacred ruby slippers', or whatever the hell those things are.

Anyway, to the point. You've been saying that having your people legally obliged to admit homosexuals violates 'natural law'? Say what now? What do you mean by 'natural law'? The laws of nature, which usually involves being killed and eaten by a superior physical specimen. I know some Gay people like to work out, but what do you think they'll do to you? Bring you down like a Gazelle and gnaw on your carcass? Although a potentially amusing scene, that's not what Gay people do. Any of them (despite your propaganda)

I ask because 'natural law' sounds like something that's under my jurisdiction, not yours. You take care of spirituality and all that, I'll take care of the laws of nature. And everything else of any use and importance.

I'm pretty sure you aren't talking about physics, I really can't see a law enforcing human rights violating the fundamental rules that govern space time. Are you suggesting that this policy disrupts biology? That the instinctive revulsion you feel towards homosexuality is natural, ergo attempting to suppress it is a violation of 'natural law'? Fair enough, so the suppression of natural inclinations is fundamentally wrong? Said the Pope? The POPE! A Catholic would be bad enough, but the POPE! From what I hear about what some of your lot get up to with the choirboys, they clearly agree with you.
I'm impressed in a way, you do set yourself some incredible challenges. I'm trying to save the planet, determine the fundamental structure of all reality and provide unlimited clean energy for all of mankind, but stopping teenage boys from masturbating? I know my limits.

Homosexuality is natural, by the way. This is true, because it exists. If it served no purpose, it wouldn't exist, it's not exactly a hereditary trait is it. If they were, as you say, 'not natural', evolution would have caused them to die out centuries ago. To say homosexuality is wrong is like say evolution doesn't occur!

Oh, wait.... Ah, I see what I did there.

Thing is though, you say evolution doesn't happen, and if evolution is summarised simply as organisms developing over time in order to ensure the survival of their genes, the homosexuality could be seen as counter evidence to this. So homosexuality must be an act of God. So which is it?

Or have I mixed you up with fundamentalists? I can never tell you lot apart. Either way, you're wrong. We all know it, stop trying to dress up your prejudice with nonsense terms you creepy old freak.

You need to relax mate. What you so worked up about? What would happen if you did allow homosexuals into the catholic church? You've been doing it for centuries. I know it sounds bad, the church would end up as some institution where women weren't allowed and all the men hung around together wearing elaborate clothes.

Yeah, sounds awful doesn't it.

Long story short, this anti-gay vitriol is a bit rich coming from a guy who (allegedly), to get his job, has to have his testicles squeezed by another man, in front of everyone.

It's not natural what you do. Ergo, by your logic, you shouldn't do it.

I know there hasn't been much in the way of scientific analysis in this letter, but that's usually a complete waste of time when I talk to you.

Stay out of my yard!

Science (BA hons)

P.S. If having an authority figure telling you what you can and can't do is so wrong, would it be OK if I got back to my stem cell work, and stuff like that? I'll just assume it is, shall I?

email: humourology (at)
Twitter: @garwboy

Social Network sharing gubbins