Reuters reported yesterday that a buttload (yes, 5,600 constitutes a “buttload”) of hitherto undiscovered sea-creatures, including the uncreatively-named “Dumbo,” because they have flaps that look like the ears of one unfortunately named cartoon elephant. Said Robert Carney (I see a theme developing here) of Louisana State University, who co-leads a study of the ocean depths as part of a wider international Census of Marine Life (COML):

“The diversity of life in the deep sea is much, much greater than we’ve believed.”

Really? I’m a lay-person, and based on what I’ve seen of Shark Week on the Discovery Channel, I believe there’s a series of numerous buttloads (see what I did there?) out there in the ocean’s depths. Among the discovered living sea-creatures was a tubeworm filled with crud…ehr, crude. Oil that is. Apparently, life, being the wacky rapscallion it is, deemed to evolve this little guy to be able to thrive on the chemicals produced from decomposing oil.

And speaking of fossil fuels, there’s news from Africa by way of Washington where an announcement came Friday from research buddies Paul Sereno and Hans Larsson, of the University of Chicago and McGill University, respectively, detailing the discovery of three new extinct crocodile fossils. Among them were Kaprosuchus saharicus, aka “BoarCroc”; Araripesuchus rattoides, aka “RatCroc”; and Laganosuchus thaumastos, aka “PancakeCroc.” The first was found in Niger, the second in Morocco, and the third seems to have gotten around and was found in both. Said Larsson, presumably with a French-Canadian accent, of the “BoarCroc:”

“BoarCroc was a 20-foot-long meat-eater with an armored snout for ramming and three sets of dagger-shaped fangs for slicing. The tusks stuck out above and below the jaw like a modern warthog. This has never been seen before on any crocodile.”

And for good reason, this thing sounds ridiculous. No wonder the thing went extinct, the predecessors of modern crocodiles probably took one look at that thing and went “you ain’t putting your genes in me” and swam away much like girls do at the bar when I’m around…if we were in a bar…by a pool. Anyway:

PancakeCroc was also 20-feet-long, but was a squat fish-eater with, get this, a pancake-like flat head, while RatCroc was 3-feet-long and ate plants and grubs. The latter possessed a pair of buckteeth in its lower jaw, which it used to dig for food. This however bore it no dignity, and somewhere along the line it shriveled up and died.

Not Pictured: This Croc's Dignity.

So what did we learn today, class? Life presses forward, despite the mistakes it made in the past and the ridiculous names scientists press onto these poor animals. Of course, then again, they don’t have to bear the name Homo. Thanks science.

I am going to be 100% honest: I’ve been working on this for over three hours now, and I hate every topic I’ve attempted. 2003 was incredibly uninteresting, especially considering that I am deliberately choosing to never include any of the poor decisions made by the Bush Administration.

At this point, I am so pissed off and frustrated that I am going to phone this in.

MythBusters is an entirely  superb television show that premiered on The Discovery Channel in 2003. I don’t want to undermine the work of Adam Savage and Jamie Hyneman. They’re seriously smart men and their understanding of physics and science in general is nothing short of flabbergasting to me. On top of being huge science nerds, they also manage to be actually funny and possess a really uncanny ability to make even the mundane aspects of what they do enjoyable to watch. They deserve more credit than this is going to give them.

MythBusters explores the validity of internet rumors, urban legends and other popular beliefs, usually regarding ways in which things can explode or humans can die. Often this is done through elaborate experiments involving vehicles, water, explosives and fancy machinery that I am not allowed to use.

Basically, thanks to Adam and Jamie, and the regularity with which The Discovery Channel re-runs the show, I now have a great understanding of how difficult it really would be to blow myself up. (Or, in some situations, how easy it might be). The show thrives because the majority of us (the western world) are scared shitless regarding how we’re going to die, and we want to know if all the fucked up ways we hear are possible are legitimate.

Generally, the show tells me, the answer is no. A shark probably won’t kill me even if it tries, and I won’t get sucked into a whirlpool and die. In case I was worried that I’d die and no one would know about it, Mythbusters has informed me that even if my car becomes sandwiched between two tractor trailer trucks that collide head on, it will still be possible to see that i was involved in the accident.

Basically, MythBusters is an interesting show to watch. It’s good for killing time in a moderately intelligent way, and I used to enjoy viewing it between classes when I lived on campus.

Check it out.

Copenhagen Climate Treaty Spearheaded By Private Corporations

This isn’t about “kum ba yah” but about corporate socialism with the goal to restrict competition and consolidate money and power in the hands of a few.  Pushing the Climate treaty are international companies with no allegiance to any nation or creed. Coca-Cola, Newsweek, Discovery Channel, Huffington Post, Cosmopolitan, Seventeen, The Wall Street Journal and Clear Channel, Yahoo, Google and AOL push to cede our nation’s sovereignty.

Complete story at  http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=116310

Possible related articles:

• http://www.modernhistoryproject.org/mhp/ArticleDisplay.php?Article=NoneDare04#Corporate

Ghost Hunters, on Syfy.

I’ve noticed something really vexxing in the world of television: networks copying each other’s shows. This is hardly new, of course. The Flintstones, for example, was basically a Stone Age retread of The Honeymooners. But it seems to have reached really annoying levels lately.

I’m talking about the fact that there’s at least two cake decorating shows out there (Cake Boss on TLC and Ace of Cakes on the Food Network), at least two “ghost hunting” shows (Ghost Hunters on SyFy (and its two spinoffs), Ghost Adventures on the Travel Channel, and I’m pretty sure at least one on Discovery and one on History, but I don’t recall the names), at least a couple tattoo shows (L.A. Ink and Miami Ink, on TLC and Inked on History), and multiple “blue collar” jobs shows (Deadliest Catch, Pawn Stars, Ice Road Truckers, Swords, Roughnecks, Ax Men and others).

The not-at-all similar Ghost Adventures on the Travel Channel!

This is a really sad situation. First off, most of these shows air on networks that haven’t got anything to do with the show’s subject matter. What the hell does something about people driving trucks on the ice have to do with history? But I’ve made that complaint before.

Much worse is the incredible lack of creativity these copycat shows embody. It takes no real effort to look around at someone else’s hit show and say, “hey, we can do that, too!”

I dunno. We the audience deserve better than this crap, but I know they wouldn’t make it if we didn’t watch it. I’m not sure who is more damned by that statement.

Tempo fa era la mia trasmissione preferita (contratto sky scaduto) con i loro innumerevoli esperimenti bizzarri quanto intriganti e stupefacenti!

Oggi li ho riscoperti grazie ad un link inviatomi da un amico.

Il primo video è una loro demo mentre il secondo è quel link. Da non perdere…

Promo:

La danza di una goccia d’acqua:

É um prazer estar com você mais uma vez aqui no RD1. Hoje, praticamente invadindo a madrugada… É que é o seguinte, eu trabalho numa escolinha de futebol, daí tem dias que saio cedo e outros que não. Mas estamos aí, mesmo de madrugada, até aí peço desculpas a eventualmente alguém que esperava as 21h, mas meu patrão me segurou por ali “Me Ajuda aí Felipe” … Já diria o Datena….

TV Aberta x TV Fechada

Segundo informações de uma revista conceituada, a Rede Globo perdeu 12% de audiência em 5 anos e o SBT 4%. Dos 12% que a Globo perdeu; 3% foram para a Record, os outros 9% migraram para a TV Fechada, somados com os 4% integrais do SBT; a TV Fechada recebeu em 5 anos 13% da audiência da TV Aberta.

Vem a tona a velha discussão se a TV fechada substituiria a tv aberta, posteriormente a internet substituiria  a TV e assim por diante… Mas o que é fato mesmo, é que o telespectador tem buscado qualidade. Qualidade esta, que se encontra nos canais fechados, onde o telespectador consegue acompanhar grandes produções do cinema, séries renomadas, programas inteligentes, esporte 24h, desenhos pra família… A TV Fechada proporciona, sem dúvida, a melhor programação familiar, até pela diversidade de canais oferecidos pelas operadoras de TV por assinatura. E por que tem ocorrido essa fuga da TV Aberta para a fechada?  Vários fatores influenciam esse acontecimento: O Brasileiro tem conseguido um salário melhor, isso é fato… Além da taxa de desemprego ter caído de uns anos para cá. Mas, talvez, o principal motivo, seja a facilidade e ajustes nos preços que as operadoras tem oferecido para os clientes. Aí entra algo que atrapalhou muito a TV aberta, o monopólio, que não existe nas operadoras de TV. SKY, NET, TVA, Telefônica, têm procurado seus clientes oferecendo o produto de maior qualidade e também o mais em conta para a população. Onde há essa disputa? Nos pacotes que elas oferecem. Hoje com 40/50 reais você já consegue ter canais como SporTV, Discovery, GloboNews…

Evidente que ainda está longe de acontecer uma briga entre TV Aberta e fechada pela audiência, mas inegavelmente, a TV Fechada tem sido uma alternativa buscada pelos telespectadores.

Valeu, abraço a todos e cuide-se bem (Já diria Téo José)…

Por: Clailson Vieira

The post-modern world is rather fond of saying that there are no absolutes. A logical counter to this is to ask the relativist whether his statement about absolutes is absolute. He is in the difficult position of refuting his own claim whenever he states it. In rational debates this breaks the law of non-contradiction.

For several years, since reading Christian apologists like CS Lewis and Ravi Zacharias, I have been convinced that there is only one internally consistent worldview, and that is the biblical worldview. All other explanations of reason and existence cut the ground out from under themselves. Either the beliefs themselves are self-refuting, like the man who tried to disprove the existence of air; he was using air as he tried to deny it; or they reduce to absurdities; or they never really deal with the fundamental questions, but rely on borrowed but unadmitted presuppositions from other worldviews. In the final case, we consider their beliefs to be arbitrary, rather than rational.

My explanation could not have been termed with such clarity without first reading Dr. Jason Lisle’s new book, The Ultimate Proof of Creation. Creationists have plenty of evidence for the biblical history of the world. They have evidence contradicting the evolutionary and uniformitarian theories of origins. Bible-believing scientists are even doing real science all the time (science of observation and technological advancement to improve our lives), just as they have done for thousands of years. None of these things convinces a man committed to a naturalist worldview. But no naturalist can debate against the Bible, for evolution, or conduct science of his own without assuming things that can only be true if the things the Bible teaches are true. This is the ultimate proof, to engage skeptics on their worldview.

This method has several advantages. First, it keeps in mind that the motive for Christian apologetics is to glorify God and to invite non-Christians to be saved. Thoughtful meekness is what the Bible directs us to have when responding to critics. The Bible also teaches that if we do not live consistently with our beliefs, our critics have reason to ridicule us and those beliefs. Consistency is a biblical tactic.

Second, the Bible does give instructions for debate. Dr. Jason Lisle has applied two verses in Proverbs to his debating style. Do not let a skeptic convince you to fight on neutral ground when the question you are debating is inherently about the reliability of your ground as opposed to all others. For a Christian to abandon, for the sake of argument, his belief in God and dependence on the account of the Bible, is to surrender before he has even lifted his sword. But we can do an internal critique of the skeptic’s position, making apparent where he contradicts himself or leaves questions unanswered.

Third, and I really appreciate this one, a Christian apologist using these techniques does not need to be a PhD or have memorized an encyclopedia of scientific evidence for Creation. Creation science is valid and interesting, but not every believer is called to that kind of knowledge of the world as he is called to give a reason for the hope that is in him and to preach the gospel to every creature. In my experience, it is great for a philosophical person like me to team up with someone who knows a lot of facts, and to tag-team a discussion. Or I could practice a bit more so that I can have some representative cases of creationism scientifically supported.

The Ultimate Proof of Creation is an interesting book on logic and worldviews, exciting as I think of applying it. Think of watching the Discovery Channel and being able to identify the worldview being used, the presuppositions made, and the logical fallacies committed. This book enables you to do that. Or it can help when you’re trying to stay focused when witnessing to a friend who doubts the Bible. Learn to find ways to tie all questions into a question of faith: do you accept the ultimate standard of God, who created you – or do you reject Him and therefore all that depends on Him (including your will and rationality)?

To God be all glory,
Lisa of Longbourn

THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION
There are people resemling one another, at least seven according to sources.
If some such people, of different ages, are arranged in a row, we will be tempted to believe that they are related to each other.
The casual similarity of the outline of east coast of America and the west coast of Africa, was enough to jump to the conclusion that, one broke away from the other, as if these are ice blocks!
There is the Kennedy rock hill, which looks like the profile of the ex President of the USA, when viewed from a particular point.
A scientific theory must be subjected to the same hair splitting analysis, as is customary in a criminal case. A single evidence against the prosecution theory will, if the evidence is admitted in the court, enable the culprit to get away with it.
SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST
If survival is the aim of evolution, plancktons, grass and cockroaches are better evolved than mammals, many species of wich have been totally wiped off from the earth. Man is extremely vulnerable.
If the resmblance in behavior is studied, asian elephants are much more similar to us, than the chimpanzee. It was in the news that a female elephant, of a circus company, was eloped by a wild elephant. Savitry, the circus elephant, returned after some months in the forest, carrying a baby in its woumb! Did they love each other as cildren, before Savitry was caught by men? Otherwise why did its lover pick her for mating?
 My father used to tell us about an elephant which could write 51 letters of Malayalam in sand, using a stick.

 Man is envious. Other creatures exploit species, different from their own. Man exploits his own brothers, making them slaves either directly or by giving wages.
Today, he is making a large number of nulear power plants, without a thought about future generations, who will curse us, after we have left the scene.
All through history he has done only one thing kill ) to the pwer of billion billion !

The Discovery Channel just came out with a sequel to their first The World Is Just Awesome spot by 72 and Sunny. I would love to someday work for clients like this that lend themselves to stunning ads reminding us how awesome it is to be alive. I know not every product is going to result in advertising that makes you glad that you experienced it, but isn’t that a worthy goal. Selection of the music is considered a responsibility for copywriters who need to be in tune to these “emotional shortcuts.” Here’s another extended spot from Wieden+Kennedy I saw before the summer games that must be played loud!

My awesome instructor for Wordsmithing, Patrick Buchanan, works in-house for Chevy in Detroit. He’s currently working on stuff for the upcoming winter games and I’m incredibly jealous.

I can’t wait for Vancouver ‘10!

Since 2003 the motorcycle industry as a whole has received a huge visibility boost courtesy of The Discovery Channel’s (and later TLC’s) reality based show American Chopper. The wildly popular show chronicles the day-to-day operations of Orange County Choppers, a custom motorcycle shop located in Newburgh, New York. Of course, unless you have been under a rock for the past few years you already know this… and you also know that besides manufacturing some of the most incredibly detailed theme bikes in the world, part of what has made the show so interesting is the often tumultuous relationship between father and son owners Paul Teutul and Paul Jr. Things have gotten so bad that Paul Jr has now left OCC to launched his own design company Paul Jr. Designs.

I recently caught up with him to discuss his past with OCC, his future with Paul Jr. Designs and a few other things.

_____________________________________________

SWAG: I’ve often wondered what you were like growing up. Were you a good kid or one of those troublemakers?

PAUL: I was a pretty good kid. I hated school but loved my friends.

SWAG: What were your interests back then and what was your family life like?

PAUL: I was always very curious about how things worked and I enjoyed sports and building things. I had a pretty dysfunctional upbringing due to the fact that my father was a heavy drinker. Only by the grace of God am I.

SWAG: At what point did you become interested in motorcycles?

PAUL: I didn’t become interested in motorcycles until about 18. I was always around them but not that interested. Growing up we always had quads instead of motorcycles but my first motorcycle was a Yamaha RZ 350… it was a 2 stroke. I eventually sold it, but bought another one just like it and still have it to this day.

SWAG: By the time we were all introduced to you on TV you had already developed a keen eye for design and the ability to make your visions reality. What were some key things in your life that brought you to that place and honed those skills and when did you know you had the gift of design or that it would be your life’s passion?

PAUL: I was exposed to motorcycles at such a young age, but again had little interest. I had worked in the steel business for 10 years prior to television and then had the opportunity to have creative freedom with building motorcycles. Only then did I realize my God given creative abilities and started really exploring what I was capable of.

SWAG: OCC got a huge shot in the arm when Discovery began broadcasting a behind the scenes look at your business. How did the relationship between OCC and Discovery begin? Did they approach you guys or did you take the show idea to them?

PAUL: Discovery was looking for a motorcycle reality show on the east coast. They asked the co-executive producer of Survivor to find the show and he looked online, found us and almost immediately we began filming. We had no intention of having a show and we had no idea the phenomenon it would become.

SWAG: In the past 10 years you have designed some of the most recognized custom bikes in the world. Is there one that you are particularly proud of?

PAUL: Always what comes to mind is the Black Widow. It was the first bike for the series and not only is it one of my favorites; it seems to be a huge fan favorite as well.

SWAG: You experienced a tremendous amount of fame at a relatively young age. How has that affected your personal life?

PAUL: The good part about fame is you gain some financial freedom, become a role model and have the ability to have a positive impact on people around the world. Fortunately for me, I’ve lived in the same town all my life so I think that adds to the normalcy. The down side is that you lose your privacy and anonymity.

SWAG: You have worked with your father for a couple of decades. How does it make you feel to be on your own and calling all the shots now?

PAUL: It feels really good to be on my own, in my own company. I still own a part of OCC, so technically I own two companies. With that said there are a tremendous amount of challenges as well as expenses in starting a company, but I’ve been fortunate enough to have some unbelievable clients.

SWAG: Your volatile relationship with your father has been laid out there for anyone with a TV and a cable connection to see. First, how much of the rough side we see on TV is reality and how much of it is edited for the sake of a good show? And second, do you see a time when you might work with your father again? Would you ever consider going back to OCC?

PAUL: In the past our arguments, though always intense, could seem more frequent then they really were due to the obvious desire in production to use every one of them in the show. I wish I could say the fights were staged, but unfortunately that’s not the case and that’s exactly why I can’t see us working together in the same capacity. Due to circumstances beyond my control, I have been forced out of the situation, in spite of my ownership interest. I think my brother Michael said it best when he said, “It would take an act of God to get us back together.”

SWAG: It appeared that you and Vinnie DiMartino had a close relationship. Just out of curiosity do you have contact with him now?

PAUL: Me and Vinnie were very close. We grew up in the same town and went to school together. I see him on occasion, but our relationship is not what it used to be.

SWAG: By the way… the new website www.pauljrdesings.com looks great. It also looks like a lot of work… it’s very intense!

PAUL: The new website was very time consuming and continues to be time consuming as it is always changing.

SWAG: And speaking of looking great… the new logo is killer! Tell me about the process of developing it.

PAUL: It was important to me for the Paul Jr. Designs logo to be as good, if not better than the OCC logo I created many years ago. The idea behind the logo was to use my new company name, Paul Jr. Designs, and integrate it into the logo itself. I figured the “JR” that makes up the crown would be appropriate because that distinguishes me from my father, even though technically I’m not a junior.  As far as integrating the “JR” into the crown, it took both me and Rachael (Ed Note: Paul’s better half) to figure out how to make that work. I am extremely excited about the new logo and feel like it is diverse enough to be used on a variety of things.

SWAG: The new Coleman 10 Year Anniversary Grill you created is a testament to your skills as an innovative designer and to the fact that those skills are not just limited to motorcycles. How did the Coleman relationship come about and was your approach different with a non-motorcycle project?

PAUL: Being that the idea behind Paul Jr. Designs was to expand my work into new products, the transition from bike to grill was a no brainer. We set out to find a company that had a vision for innovation, and Coleman was that company. With ten years of working with some of the top companies in the world, Coleman is up there with the best of the best and they have been phenomenal to work with. I look forward to future projects with them.

SWAG: For a lot of us, you were and will always be the true talent at OCC. I know you are expanding your horizons with other product and that is way cool… but many would be disappointed if you stay completely away from motorcycles. Will we see a Paul Jr. theme bike one day?

PAUL: First of all thank you. As for custom theme bikes, I can’t wait to build the first PJD blown out custom chopper. I think I will find a nice balance between inventing and innovating products that are both practical and affordable, including building tricked out custom bikes for individuals and corporations. The future is a very exciting thing!

SWAG: Paul, thanks for taking the time to chat. I look forward to seeing what Paul Jr. Designs creates in the future! Any parting words?

PAUL: Thanks so much to the people who have supported me and continue to support me! I hope everyone finds my new company and new direction as exciting as I do.

_____________________________________________

© 2009 Biker Swag, All Rights Reserved. No part of this article/interview may be reproduced in any format without express written permission.

El productor de cine Ryan Casey buscaba localizaciones en Alaska durante el año 1995 cuando descubrió las olas que producen los glaciares al desprenderse.

Doce años después convenció a los surferos Garrett McNamara y Kealii Mamala para subirse a lo alto de estos monstruos de más de 9 metros y el resultado es un espectacular documental para el Discovery Channel. Durante los largos segundos que los surferos aguantaron sobre las olas, cualquier movimiento en falso podría haberles empujado bajo el hielo.

Not that I’ll ever have time to play it when it comes out, but this story about a video game caught my eye earlier today solely for featuring the phrase “Nazi Dinosaurs” in the title.

- sf1

Pretty decent documentary by Discovery Channel that goes along with the new 2012 movie that just hit theatres yesterday. It takes a more scientific approach and goes over the probabilities regarding each of the possible scenarios that others have suggested over the years.

The production quality is quite good, definitely a solid watch, even with all the other great 2012 documentaries that have come to the small screen lately. The only downside is the guests are heavily weighted in favour of debunkers, still, it’s entertaining.

Click for download links

From the Discovery Channel. For more see: http://www.howstuffworks.com/

Check out the video on the Bio-Brain! COOL..