Skip to content

Blood Moon Apocalypse Shall Destroy The Cosmos!

Blood Moon Apocalypse Shall Destroy The Cosmos! published on

Once again the world will be coming to an end as the widely prophesied Blood Moon prepares to destroy the universe! And it all happens this weekend! It might be happening right now, at this very moment!

Due to some sort of astronomical phenomenon ( namely a combination of lunar eclipse, which usually makes the moon look red, and the moon coming closer than usual to the earth) this Sunday night (US time) the moon will appear to be really big and really red. While sensible people will simply go, “Whoa! Cool!” and take lots of selfies with a big red thing in the background, the astronomically stupid are predicting the end of life on earth. According to them, this is all part of a “tetrad,” a fancy word that stupid people use in a futile attempt to sound smart. All it really means is that it’s the fourth lunar eclipse to come at six lunar month intervals and to land on Jewish holidays – September the 28th is the Feast of the Tabernacle. Funnily enough, it’s not the Jews freaking out but the Christians. According to the not-so-wise men, previous tetrads have been the harbingers of disaster. In 1492, the tetrad led to Jews being kicked out of Spain on the pretext that anyone who did not like ham must be up to no good. In 1948 it led to the Arab-Israeli war. And, worst of all, in 1982 it led to the birth of Nicki Minaj.

Most of the hysterics seem to be coming from Evangelical Christians and Mormons who think this all signals the second coming of the messiah, and hence the end of the world — because the messiah is just that kind of guy. Apparently, the Bible itself predicts this terrible event when Saint Peter says something along the lines of “the sun shall be turned to darkness, and the moon shall become like unto blood, a Communist pope shall go to dinner with the Great Satan, and all men shall know that the great and terrible day of the Lord has arrived!” Peter the Rock. Peter the Rock-Headed, more like.

While it is usually the Evangelicals that come out looking as the biggest fools in these situations, this time it looks as if they are being outdone by the Mormons. Panic amongst the latter group has been so widespread that Utah stores are reporting massive increases in the sales of freeze-dried food, torches, blankets, and tin foil hats. In another surprise development, the main driver of the apocalyptic panic this time round is a woman called Julie Rowe, a Mormon who has been going on about the apocalypse for quite a while and who claims all sorts of nutty stuff usually reserved for the comic books. Frankly, I’m surprised she isn’t expecting Galactus to come round and eat everyone! I guess it all goes to show that the distaff side of the Mormon faith has worse things to answer for than Twilight.

Things have gotten so ridiculous that the heads of the Mormon Church have issued a half-assed “stay calm” announcement in which they tell their followers that no apocalypse is imminent but that they should always be prepared for adversity. Way to play both sides of the fence, doofuses. And NASA has jumped in by reassuring people that, no, the earth is not due to be hit by an asteroid this weekend. Stan Lee has also reassured the teeming hordes by pointing out that if Galactus does indeed return this Sunday, the Fantastic Four will be there to stop him, just as they have every other time!

The religious people can hunker down in their well-stocked basements all they want. But not me. No, I prefer to think that when the end comes it will be not at the hands of God’s son Jesus, but rather at the hands of Hank Pym’s son Ultron. That bastard has it in for the entire human race and the way he keeps evolving it’s just a matter of time before the Age of Ultron becomes all too real. And that, my friends, is at least six months away.

Perverted Teen Gets Off On Probation

Perverted Teen Gets Off On Probation published on

17 year old menace to society, Cormega Copening, has been allowed to escape a custodial sentence for the heinous crime of taking photos of Cormega Copening and then showing those photos to another underage person, also, coincidentally, called Cormega Copening. Who the hell would have thought that Cormega Copening would be such a common name anywhere, much less in North Carolina?

Yes, that’s how dumb Amerika has gotten. The kid with the unlikely handle was hit with five charges of sexual exploitation for taking and possessing sexually explicit photos of a minor, that minor being himself. He was actually named in court as both perpetrator and victim, which makes this the case of Copening vs. Copening! After trying very hard to get himself to drop the charges against himself, Copening gave in to himself and took a plea deal. According to both lawyers involved in the case, their client is very pleased with himself.

As part of his one year probation deal, Copening (that’s the perpetrator one, not the victim one) must stay away from cellphones, do some community service and take a class on making good decisions – such as moving to a less idiotic jurisdiction. The judge also advised him not to jerk off during the probation period, as that could get him charged with sexually abusing a minor.

Get your legal idiocy right here.

Fat Woman Throws Internet Tantrum

Fat Woman Throws Internet Tantrum published on

I probably would have ignored this bit of female whining were it not for the Old Navy thing yesterday, wherein some fat woman burst into tears then ran out of the store (slowly, I assume) then ran back into the store, bought a hideous tank top and posted photos of her obese self as a response to criticism of … her obesity! That I could ignore, but a second case so hot on the heels? Well, that’s just too good to let go.

It seems – she wouldn’t be the first woman to make up a story to get some attention – some fattish girl went on a date. Dude liked her but did not fancy her and wrote her a somewhat clumsy message saying so. As letdown letters go, it’s actually a pretty nice one, certainly compared to what most guys would get. But being a strong, independent woman she burst into tears over the whole affair – or rather the lack of a whole affair. She then, being a modern woman, took to the internet to tell us all about her precious feelz. And of course, since this is a woman in some sort of distress, the media has picked up her ludicrous rant and run for the goal posts. Funny thing is, she ain’t that bad looking, but that’s assuming the photos weren’t taken fifty pounds ago. And with a character like hers, you could look like Alexis Texas or that other porn star who married Kanye West and still be deeply unattractive.

If you feel like a good laugh, you can read the entire bucket of dribble here, but I will simply comment on the most pertinent bits.

At the start of the article we are informed that “Michelle wasn’t particularly bothered whether she saw or spoke to her date ever again.”

And yet she burst into tears at being rejected by this man whose existence was pretty much irrelevant to her. What kind of pussy acts this way? I could understand if she was in luuuurve with the dude, but someone she was indifferent to? Another fine example of the insanity so increasingly popular these days – especially amongst women.

“I was on another date when I received your message. He returned from the loo to find me in a flood of tears. He was lovely, but baffled, and hasn’t been in touch since, funnily enough.”

No shit. After finding her crying into the salad he probably figures he’s dodged a bullet. All we have to do now is await another blog post in which she cries about this second dude not contacting her again.

“I’m sure I’d like Charlize Theron, too if I ever met her. I hear good things.”

Like i said, second dude dodged a bullet. A woman who likes someone who hangs out with child-rape apologist Eve Ensler is not someone you want stealing your blankets in the middle of the night.

“I like to think I come across as a confident, happy woman.”

Confident people don’t burst into tears over a clumsily worded “No go, babe.”

“Did you see me and think “She has far too high an opinion of herself, she needs bringing down a peg or two”?”

Paranoid, as well as weak. If he was trying to take her down he would have been a lot meaner and not spent so much time reassuring her by going on about everything from her pretty face to her brilliant mind.

“we all know the internet is a dangerous place to be a woman with opinions”

There’s another sign of full-on feminism. Fact is, the internet’s “dangerous” for anyone with opinions, and some studies even show that you are more likely to be hassled online if you are a man. I’m surprised she didn’t scream “The patriarchy hates my fat ass!”

“Then I cried in my Slimming World group.”

Confident Woman Weeps Again — great title for a feminist action movie!

“There’s nothing you can say that will make me think that you’re not a disgrace to your gender.”

Nice, huh? Imagine if the dude was black and she had written that he was disgrace to his race. Yeah, that’s the kind of thing she’s doing.

“What truly concerns me, the real reason I’m responding so publicly, is the fact that you have a 13 year old daughter.”

In her most shameful act, she is now trying to imply that he is a bad dad for not wanting to fuck fat women with serious mental issues.

She finishes off with this masterpiece of self-ignorance…

“Give her the tools to develop a bomb-proof sense of self-esteem so that if… the time comes that a small, unhappy man attempts to corrode it, she can respond as I do now.”

“ respond as I do now.” Yes, by bursting into tears – not once but twice – and then whining on the internet. That’s what we want, yet another generation of deluded, emotionally fragile women.

There are two primary reasons why I find this entire thing so offensive. The first is the sheer weakness of the woman, and the fact that she actually thinks she is being strong. Humans being, for the most part, irrational monkeys with a tendency to copy the behavior of others, this is an open invitation for the other lemmings to do as she does. Not only do they get the satisfaction of feeling both strong and victimized at the same time, but if they’re lucky they’ll get their names into the newspapers! Of course, by being weak they make it harder for themselves, and the lower classes, to cope with life’s real adversities, but it’s the short term emotional satisfaction that matters. The second thing that makes me feel like there’s a weasel on acid running around in my underpants is the way the media only cares about this kind of crap when it’s a woman that’s feeling bad. Can anyone imagine some fat guy posting a selfie wearing a tank top and going on about how “fierce” he looks being anything other than an instant internet joke? I can’t, but that’s what happened with the Old Navy woman. And can anyone imagine the major sites picking up a blog post in which some fat guy complains – literally cries about – some woman telling him that he’s a great bloke but that she just doesn’t dig him physically? Nope, me neither.

A PSA Regarding the Straw Man Fallacy

A PSA Regarding the Straw Man Fallacy published on

I am really sick of seeing people use the term “Straw Man” to mean a situation in which someone pretends that their opponent is something they are not. Screaming that your opponent is a misogynist because they are against quotas is not “Straw manning,” it’s just making an irrational and unsupported claim. I suppose it’s a type of ad hominem, an attempt to vilify the messenger in order to have the message dismissed, but it is not a “Straw man.” I suspect the problem here is the very term straw man. The last word implies that it is an attack on the man, not the ball – then, quite literally, an “ad hominem.” But that is not what the straw man fallacy actually is.

The real meaning of the straw man fallacy is the replacing of the opponent’s actual argument with a fabricated one which is easier to beat. Once the fabricated argument has been beaten, the dishonest fucker claims victory. Since us amateur logicians don’t get taken very seriously, here is a quote, verbatim, from a US university text entitled “A Concise Introduction to Logic,” by Patrick J. Hurley, a professor emeritus at the University of San Diego…

“The straw man fallacy is committed when an arguer distorts an opponent’s argument for the purpose of more easily attacking it, demolishes the distorted argument, and then concludes that the opponent’s real argument has been demolished.”

For example. An MRA says, “Western women have it better than Western men.” Since nobody except a total pinhead could honestly dispute this, the MRA’s feminist opponent gnashes her teeth, rends her garments, and screams hysterically, “OMG! He said women have it better than men! What about all those women in Afghanistan, you misogynist bastard!?!?!” and then proceeds to give all sorts of admittedly valid evidence as to why women in Afghanistan have it worse than men. Problem is, the MRA’s statement was about Western women, not Afghan women. His argument has been distorted, misrepresented – it has been “straw manned.”

Figuratively speaking, what the straw man fallacy adds up to is that you can’t beat Mike Tyson, so you simply put together a dummy that looks somewhat like a big, black guy with no neck, then you beat the shit out of the dummy and prance around shouting “I beat Mike Tyson!” No, you just beat something you claim is Mike Tyson.

I hope this clarifies the true meaning of the Straw Man Fallacy and prevents future confusion. And just remember, you don’t need to trust me — you just need to trust Professor Hurley.

Ashley Judd Digs Deep

Ashley Judd Digs Deep published on

Unfortunately, what she is digging is a grave for her tiny brain. Recently, the lukewarm actress complained of being sworn at after expressing some opinion or other about one of those things where a bunch of men throw their balls at one another.

Now, she’s gone all the way to writing an article for some site or other in which she expands on one set of unproven claims with a second set of unproven claims and throws in a lot of feminist tripe just for the hell of it.

While a reasonable person knows that the internet is full of these things called trolls, who like to make people unhappy just for the lolls, Judd claims it’s all because she’s a wiminz. Her being an actress and all, I give her the benefit of the doubt and assume she’s dumb rather than dishonest when she claims it’s all some sort of patriarchal thing rather than a bunch of jerks going after a soft target. But what really gets me about this whole thing is her insistence that what she experienced is “gender-based violence.”

This latter is a fine example of both Hollywood idiocy and of the dangerous and stealthy way in which feminism redefines terms to suit its own aims. If the idea takes hold that calling someone a nasty name is a type of violence, why would it not eventually become something that can land you in jail? After all, it’s violence and we all know violent people belong in jail. This is dangerous and contemptible even if one does not look further – if one does, then it gets even scarier. If calling Judd a whore is violence, why shouldn’t it be violence to call Obama or Cheney scumbags? Assuming she’s a Democrat (as safe an assumption as one can make, I would wager) she has probably referred to many Republican politicians by all sorts of colorful names. This means, by her own standards, that she has committed acts of violence and should therefore be the subject of police reports the same way her trolls are. She is also claiming that she was threatened with rape, but as she gives no evidence of that I am not taking it seriously. Funny, huh? The most serious charge she has to make and no evidence provided. She has caps of people being mean to her, but does not bother to give us caps of the so-called rape threats. And even if such threats were made, they are not violence, either – just the kind of meaningless threat one sees on the internet all the time. Being a rabid feminist weasel, Judd uses the article to go on about all sorts of claptrap, such as the “what was the rape victim wearing” thing, something which I have only ever seen happen in the minds of deranged feminist weasels. I’m sure it does occasionally happen, but it is so uncommon that I have never actually been witness to that particular bit of stupidity – and god knows i’ve seen plenty of stupidity. Which brings us back to the knuckle-dragging halfwit who wrote the piece, a piece in which she, ironically, complains of being called dumb while also doling out howlers such as these…

“in which my genitals, vaginal and anal, should…”
“an attempted oral rape by yet another adult man.”

That’s right, folks, Ashley Judd, a woman who objects to being called stupid and who thinks her opinions matter, thinks her asshole is part of her genitals! Good thing she never had children. As for “adult man,” what other kind is there? Is the definition of “man” not “an adult, male human”? It is in my world. Let’s face it, anyone this hilariously stupid should not be allowed to write on anything of substance. Indeed, it pretty much makes me wish that sport was the only thing she blabbed about.

Idiocy here.