Total Drek

Or, the thoughts of several frustrated intellectuals on Sociology, Gaming, Science, Politics, Science Fiction, Religion, and whatever the hell else strikes their fancy. There is absolutely no reason why you should read this blog. None. Seriously. Go hit your back button. It's up in the upper left-hand corner of your browser... it says "Back." Don't say we didn't warn you.

Friday, November 06, 2009

Over at the old sausage fest...

For some reason I just can't help but find this article over on Conservapedia to be beautiful:



Or, in plain human language:

A hot dog, or Frankfurter, is a sausage made from beef or pork (or both). Many packaged and readily available types contain chicken and mechanically-recovered meat of various unspecified kinds. Hot dogs contain seasonings and are cured and cooked. In recent years, vegetable and soy hot dogs have also gained popularity.

Hot dogs are among America's favorite foods. Hot dogs are usually served with the following condiments: (but not usually all at once)

-Ketchup
-Mustard
-Relish
-Chili
-Onions
-Sauerkraut

Hot dogs were first served in buns at the Chicago World Fair of 1893.

In Popular Culture

There is often an debate as to why hot dogs come in packages of 8, when hot dog buns come in packs of 6 (or other numbers that do not agree). This often leads to much philosphical musing as to why two products, which compliment each other so well, are so mismatched.


I don't know what it is- maybe that simple-minded listing of condiments- but this article is just lovely to me. Maybe it's just that it seems to be one of the only articles on Conservapedia that doesn't take a random, mysterious swipe at "liberals." There's nothing like, "Veggie hotdogs have gained popularity among dirty liberals who don't care about hard-working ranchers," lurking in the text. It's just a relatively straightforward, if laughably incompetent, article about hotdogs.

Then again, maybe it's just that Conservapedia has finally jumped the shark for me now that Schlafly is claiming that nobody denies that all of the inhabitable earth has been flooded, and that therefore Noah's Ark is a simpler explanation for extinction than evolution because evolution can't explain how animals survived the Noachian flood. No, seriously:

Second, the theory of evolution has even greater difficulties explaining how species survived massive flooding. No one credibly denies that worldwide flooding occurred; even today the world is over 70% covered with water, most remaining inhabitable land is within 100 feet of sea level, and limestone deposits from water are found at all heights. Local, but massive, flooding occurs frequently and widely, with devastating affects. The theory of evolution does not have a more plausible explanation for how species survive this in the long run.


I mean, hell, where do you go from that? Do we actually have to wait for Schlafly to put on the tinfoil hat and run down the street in a diaper? The man has hit his peak- he should retire while he's on top.

Labels: , ,

1 Comments:

Blogger scripto said...

"nobody denies that all of the inhabitable earth has been flooded...

Well, if nobody includes every geologist who has ever lived in the last 150 years, I guess he's right. And having a 500 year old man and his wife and kids float around for a year in a boat with every species who has ever lived, complete with their specialized diets and parasites makes way more sense. I'm convinced.

Friday, November 06, 2009 5:33:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Site Meter