Merry Christmas (With Statistics)

Read this somehwhere:

Is Santa Real?



1) No known species of reindeer can fly. BUT there are 300,000 species of living organisms yet to be classified, and while most of these are insects and germs, this does not COMPLETELY rule out flying reindeer which only Santa has ever seen.

2) There are 2 billion children (persons under 1 in the world. BUT since Santa doesn't (appear) to handle the Muslim, Hindu, Jewish and Buddhist children, that reduces the workload to 15% of the total - 378 million according to Population Reference Bureau. At an average (census) rate of 3.5 children per household, that's 91.8 million homes. One presumes there's at least one good child in each.

3) Santa has 31 hours of Christmas to work with, thanks to the different time zones and the rotation of the earth, assuming he travels east to west (which seems logical). This works out to 822.6 visits per second. This is to say that for each Christian household with good children, Santa has 1/1000th of a second to park, hop out of the sleigh, jump down the chimney, fill the stockings, distribute the remaining presents under the tree, eat whatever snacks have been left, get back up the chimney, get back into the sleigh and move on to the next house. Assuming that each of these 91.8 million stops are evenly distributed around the earth (which, of course, we know to be false but for the purpose of our calculations we will accept), we are now talking about .78 miles per household, a total trip of 75 million miles, not counting stops to do what most of us must do at least once every 31 hours, plus feeding, etc.

This means that Santa's sleigh is moving at 650 miles per second, 3,000 time the speed of sound. For purposes of comparison, the fastest man-made vehicle on earth, the Ulysses space probe, moves at a poky 27.4 miles per second - a conventional reindeer can run, tops, 15 miles per hour.

4) The payload on the sleigh adds another interesting element. Assuming that each child gets nothing more than a medium-sized lego set (2 pounds), the sleigh is carrying 321,300 tons, not counting Santa, who is invariably described as overweight. On land, the conventional reindeer can pull no more than 300 pounds. Even granting the "flying reindeer" (see point #1) could pull TEN TIMES the normal amount, we cannot do the job with eight, or even nine. We need 214,200 reindeer. This increases the payload -not even counting the weight of the sleigh - to 353,430 tons. Again, for comparison - this is four times the weight of the Queen Elizabeth.

5) 353,000 tons travelling at 650 miles per second creates enormous air resistance - this will heat the reindeer up in the same fashion as spacecraft re-entering the earth's atmosphere. The lead pair of reindeer will absorb 14.3 QUINTILLION joules of energy. Per second. Each. In short, they will burst into flame almost instantaneously, exposing the reindeer behind them, and create deafening sonic booms in their wake. The entire reindeer team will be vaporized within 4.26 thousandths of a second. Santa, meanwhile, will be subjected to centrifugal forces 17,500.06 times greater than gravity. A 250-pound Santa (which seems ludicrously slim) would be pinned to the back of his sleigh by 4,315,015 pounds of force. In conclusion - If Santa ever DID deliver presents on Christmas Eve, he's dead now.

Merry Christmas!

Seriously - have a Merry Christmas & all that crap (lol). If you don't celebrate it, then enjoy your day off. And if you don't have the day off, then sorry your life SUCKS. hahaha

Peace,

- knowledge

A Blog Post Concerning (Religious) Toleration

See what I did there? Yeah? Yeah? *crickets* hahaha...hint: check out John Locke. But I digress (haha...right after I just started, too.)


Here's a piece that I wrote up a couple of months ago:


I was working today, when someone gave me a self-made pamphlet with bible passages in it. She was probably one of the nicest ladies that I've ever met. I thanked her and we got into talking about how I used to be really devout; I told her I'd definitely read it, but that I lost faith a really long time ago.

She said, "who knows, maybe you'll get it back one day". I told her that maybe I would, but it's very unlikely. Then, she said something that I haven't heard a brochure-pusher say before: "that's fine. I can't do anything about that. But maybe someone else can. And all I can do is pray that you will". She smiled at me & left with who I'm guessing was her granddaughter (who was pretty cute, might I add...) & her husband.

They seemed like truly happy people - and it made me remember how far I've come, with regards to religious toleration.

I've always been raised as a traditional christian. I used to feel guilty when I prayed without sleeping. I used to go to mass every sunday, and even took pride in altar serving.

Then, I lost faith. Shortly after, I realize that I made a mistake, and prayed for forgiveness. Then, I lost faith again - and I think I've changed too much to ever get it back. Most people end up finding some sort of connection with god through some hard times, but I doubt that'll be me.

That's not to say that I'm not happy; because I'm happier than I've ever been WITH religion in my life. But the difference between me now, and me a couple of years ago, is that I've learned to tolerate spirituality.

After losing my faith "for good", I could never understand how people could continue to believe in something like that after giving it so much thought. I would always think to myself: "how can you blindly believe in something that probably doesn't exist?"

A couple of years later, I began to adopt a "to each their own" attitude. I realized that if you need god in your life to give you purpose, then by all means, go for it. And that's exactly why I have so much respect for the religious people that can tolerate non-religious people - they understand that the lack of belief is just as important as the choice of believing.

While I'll probably never support a deity-centred religion, I'll always support spirituality. Some of the happiest people that I've ever met are religious; they'll also probably be happier than I'll ever be (but I think that's more temperament-related, than anything). 


Again, I think it's all about the axiom "to each; their own" - Happiness doesn't have to be rational. In fact, it could even be argued that it's rational for you to be irrational, if that's what makes you happy. But I guess I'll stop here before the pseudo-shit comes in.

Peace,


- knowledge
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
p.s. I've decided to give up on getting you guys to add a tag. It's definitely appreciated - but it's an uphill battle 'cause you guys are such pussies (lol). And if you can't beat 'em, join 'em, right? Besides, anonymity allows you to be as brutally honest as possible - you can say what's REALLY on your mind without being embarrassed, proved wrong, or called out (aka being a giant pussy). But seriously, I'm kidding. I've realized that I'd rather you to commented and promoted discussion, even if I don't know who the fuck you are. But in my defence, it helps to know who's who (use a number, or something. At the very least, I want to know if it's the same person posting). For the people who DO post with tags, keep doing it (aka keep not being giant pussies...haha). Just kidding, guys.


And I know I said I'd be back with my weekly drops...but I guess I lied. Please subscribe if you haven't already.

Gnosticism + Adam & Eve

One of my biggest pet peeves is the lack of accountability. With unaccountability comes the excuses that simply don't hold any weight. Let's take a textbook example: Adam & Eve:

"The snake told me to do it, therefore I'm innocent & the snake's at fault." But who was stupid(or smart) enough to eat the damn fruit?

Gnosticism shows a refreshing way of looking at this.

Maybe it's not about who's right or who's wrong. Maybe it's not about who's fault it is. Maybe it's not about any of that. What if the whole point of that story was to show a principle of human nature: our yearning for knowledge.

That apple represents knowledge. Before they ate the apple, they didn't know that they were naked. Eating the apple gave them consciousness, and in turn, knowledge. Why would that be bad?!

Would a perfect god not want us to be well-informed? Would that perfect god be afraid of what we might learn from the truth?

It shows us another very critical part of human nature: our unwillingness to accept our error in judgment. After all, why would you take the blame for something you could get away with?

I love how people try to blame the snake for "suggesting" that they eat the apple. I also like how people have tried to blame eve because she was the first to eat the apple. Why not blame adam & eve for eating the apple, themselves?

Or, you could even blame god for making a "forbidden fruit tree". That's like putting 300 horny straight men on an island (no homo) with the one hottest woman that they've all ever seen, installing cameras that clearly aren't plugged in, hiring security guards that look away and whistle at the slightest sign of trouble, putting a fence that's only a foot high, and putting a sign that says "if you're horny, approach this woman" on that fence, then telling them NOT to approach the woman...

Did the perfect god not see that coming? Or did the perfect god see it coming, & put a trap there? I don't even need to put a conclusion, because you should be able to see where I'm going with this...

Blame yourselves for YOUR actions. Everything/everyone else was only a factor in your decision.

Peace,

- knowledge

The American Terrorist

First off, I'm really sorry to anyone who was waiting on my weekly drop. I've been really busy. I originally had another topic planned, but I changed it up after seeing a movie tonight.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I just finished watching "Crossing Over" and my mind = blown.

It deals with the issue of deportation, and more importantly, self-identification with a country as a minority. For example: I'm Filipino, but not very Filipino by any means. My closest friend's aren't Filipino, and unlike most of my race, I prefer not to stick with my race - I like a little diversity. Am I Filipino, or Canadian?

I'm digressing - so that's enough about me, let's get into a part of the movie that had my mind going off in different tangents:

A Middle-Eastern muslim girl shared her perspective about 9/11 to her class. Her stance was: (in a nutshell) "As a muslim, I can understand why they felt the need to be heard - but I can't agree with the way they went about it." She was then shamed by her whole class. It jumps to a scene where she's having supper with her parents and her two siblings. They hear a knock on the door. Guess who? It's the FBI, and they've got a warrant (and here I am thinking that my doormat was fool-proof...) They've been tipped off that she's a potential terrorist. They go into her room and find paper with writings about suicide; It's her school notes about whether suicide is moral, but now It's a diary for how she justifies strapping bombs to herself. They search her computer and find her debating on a Muslim forum about whole concept of the Jihad; As a conscious Muslim, she feels the need to be educated on her Religion, as well as take in different view points. That forum is now irrefutable evidence that she's a suicide bomber.

Let's keep in mind that she got to America when she was 3, can't speak her native language, and is 15 years old. Aside from the fact that she's a devout Muslim, she's about as American as it can get (...or can't. Zagga-zing!)

Her parents and her are actually illegal immigrants, so she now has 3 options:

- Risk deportation of the whole family

- Another option which she obviously wouldn't pick (sorry, I can't remember it)

- Voluntary departure with a parent, while the other parent stays with her 2 citizen siblings (that were born there).

This is where I went nuts. Now, assuming that she wasn't a terrorist before...what if she becomes one? I know I'd certainly be angry if a country promised me "freedom of speech & thought", yet deported me for it.

If she wasn't a terrorist before, then maybe she is now. Initially, she could understand 1)where the 9/11 bombers were coming from...but 2) she couldn't support what they did. Having her life completely messed up a country that she sought freedom in may have just provided her with a reason to identify with both parts.

If she became a suicide bomber in an attempt to get even with the government...who's fault would it be? Hers, or theirs? Was she innately a terrorist all along because she could understand where they were coming from? Or did the American government trigger it with their paranoia? If she were to come back in a decade or so and commit some act of terrorism, then did the government bring it upon themselves? Or maybe a couple more years spent living as a devout Muslim coupled with her open-mindedness would have made her do it anyways...

These are all just questions to consider. It had me thinking for a while about destiny, free will, and causality.

Keep in mind that this movie's like Crash. This is just one of the characters in the movie. It's a good watch - I'd recommend it. It tackles the subject of immigration, it's loopholes, and the things people have to do to reap the benefits of a developed or even relatively "free" society.

My life's been made easier just because I happened to be "born Canadian" - and believe me, it's something that I'm proud of.

Peace,

- knowledge