If General Relativity were Written Today


Nature and other peer-review journals would send letters like this:

Dear Dr. Einstein:

Thank you for your submission.  However, as you well know, the scientific consensus maintains that light propagates through the medium of luminiferous aether. These real-world measurements of sunlight are irrelevant; when the data is entered into the computer programs which we wrote, predicated on the existence of luminiferous aether, the resulting simulations clearly support the existence of luminiferous aether.  Please do not send any more articles of such irresponsible pseudo-science.


The lack of publication in peer-reviewed journals would be used to attack relativity theory, instead of questioning the journals.


Instead of championing relativity, Arthur Eddington would have published a handy graphic using statistical obfuscation to “hide the deflection”.


The “luminiferous aether” would be renamed “light movement theory”, and supporters of relativity would be derided as “light movement deniers”.

Meanwhile, the science of optics would be re-named “looky-science” as a gesture of magnanimity from the Benevolent Masters to the Great Unwashed.

Question for Infanticide-Enablers

I understand that this is going to be a bit sciency-technical for people who think that killing a baby is something that “a woman does to her own body”.  So, I’m going to try not to delve too deeply into things like, you know, EMBRYOLOGY.

But quick question: How do you explain chicken eggs being part of their mother’s body, and how does that change when they hatch?

Conversations with Gun-Control Lunatics

Paraphrased for brevity and clarity:


Me: Not that human rights should ever be negotiable, but if gun-control were really effective at saving lives, why is the murder rate so high in Chicago, which has some of the strictest gun control in the nation?

Her: The crime in Chicago is high because of guns brought in from Indianapolis!

Me: Well, if guns are the problem, and Indianapolis is the SOURCE of the guns, shouldn’t the crime rate be higher in Indianapolis?

Her: *splutter*


Her: Concealed carry is a recipe for disaster!  Can you imagine a hundred guns in a movie theater?

Me: I know for a fact that I can distinguish and hit a man-sized target in less light than a movie screen and floor lighting provide.

Her: You are assuming that you are the only one with a gun, or that everyone else is as good you.

Me: No, I’m just not assuming that tyrants should be given the power to deny other human beings the basic human right of self defense, because those human beings are somehow so staggeringly incompetent that it would be safer to force them sit defenseless in front of a mass-murderer who is already shooting people.

Movie Review: The Delta Force (1986)

First, let me be honest: while I have immense respect for Chuck Norris as a person, I usually find his cinematic enterprises entirely unwatchable.  He simply does not engage me as an actor.

That being said, and given the fact that “The Delta Force” is Golan-Globus production (a group known more for their volume of productions than their quality), this is what modern American cinema should aspire to be.  There are none of the NAZI-sympathizing “sensibilities” of movies like “Munich”, nor the politically-correct bullshit that gutted Tom Clancy’s “Sum of All Fears” of its Arab Mohammedan villains.

For the budget that it had, it actually did a very good job of representing the groups involved.  The terrorists are NOT sympathetic characters; they are irrational murderers motivated by hatred of everyone not Mohammedan.  The U.S. military is not full of spineless, drug-addicted cowards and psychotic mass-murderers.  Regular people can be cowards, but they can also stand up to the bad guys.

Certainly, the action scenes in this move tend to be cinematized (motorcycle-borne missiles, anyone?).  On the other hand, it does a good job of representing military strategy sessions and operational training.  I’m sure Mr. Norris’ military experience was a huge benefit there.  Some of my favorite scenes actually happen in the beginning, with a German stewardess who refuses to pick out the Jews for the Mohammedan terrorists (until they threaten to kill everyone on board), and a Catholic priest (played by George Kennedy) who walks to the front of the plane with the Jews and tells the terrorists that if they are taking the Jews, they will have to take him, too.

Interestingly, the terrorists are also socialists–in the 1980’s, I think this was probably a play on FARC…  But socialism is the second-biggest motivator of terrorism worldwide (after Mohammedanism), and “CommunIslam” is a growing movement.  It may have been a case of cinematic prophecy.

A bit cheese, but highly recommended–especially for Hollywood producers.  There is more need for this sort of cinematic honesty today than there was in 1986, yet it is nowhere to be found.

Wounded Warrior Project is a Waste of Money

Just in case you didn’t know.  They reject anything to do with firearms, knives, or Christian charities–the largest communities which support veterans.  And the very things that veterans have fought to protect.  Only about half of their donations actually go to veterans; the rest go to executive salaries, parties, and marketing.

If you really want to help veterans, give your donations to the Fisher House.  And thanks for your continued support.