Wheat a minute

I see bread people.

Hi Folks

I have realised I haven't directly acknowledged you people out there, I usually write as though I am talking to someone but never address you directly.

Hello,

I am Alex Alexander (sorry, I am a liar, that's not even my real name). I write stuff down that comes into my head. I know that not a lot of people read this stuff and I am fine with that because as you have noticed (being the reader) it is mainly a brain rant or, like I said a long time ago, something like an online pensieve (the memory puddle thing in Harry Potter).
So, I would just like to take this moment to thank you for perusing my thoughts but also to ask you something.
If you have used Blogger you will know that it shows the locations of people who view the blog and I notice that I get people from the USA and Germany having a look. Now, I don't know if that is correct or just the location the internet pings from or other technical bimble babble but I would like to ask you, the reader, to just give me a little comment with something like a hello and a vague location. The country you're in would do, I'm not tying to hunt you down or anything, just curious.
And you know what they say "Curiosity killed the cat and Satisfaction brought her back", so.... you know,.... if you don't tell me, then... in a way.... you want me to die....I'm just saying... I was curious and I don't particularly want to die.

If you want to ask me anything as well then go ahead.

Yay internet, wooo, and-all-that.

A A

If you don't have anything nice to say, then don't say anything at all.

.....







A A

Plagiarism

My email account is with Yahoo, so naturally as I go to check my emails I have a flick through the "news" headlines to see what is happening, why do I keep doing it? its not even news its just... just, shit.

For those of you who don't look at Yahoo for news headline's, here is an example of a day of news headlines from them, not the actual article, just the headlines...

-Oh Andy, you've got a lot of explaining to do...
A tweet Andy Murray wrote sparked a media frenzy - and might have caused him trouble with girlfriend Kim Sears.  What he said »

-Football
-Money
-old news

-'Carol Vorderman's charity plan is insanity'
'Judge John Deed' actor Martin Shaw admires Carol's bravery, but thinks her fund-raising idea is ill-advised.  What's her goal? »

-crap celeb
-crap celeb

-Son's surprise gift leaves his Mum in tears
Mike Harris found the perfect way of surprising his Mum in heartwarming fashion.  'What? No way! We can't do this!' »

-old youtube you have already seen over and over

-Big brother shit

-stupid baby name, what could it be

-'Banning smoking in cars with kids is wrong'
Most people are in favour of the ban but our blogger says it would be dangerous to make it the law.  What could it lead to? »

-Shitty football article

-The same big brother shit again, but written by someone else.

Bla bla bla.

My point is all the actual headlines end with What...? Why...? Who...? and I never click on them because I couldn't give a flying fuck who, what, why since you have given me no reason to.
Its always, (read this in a robot voice, go on) - "VAGUE SUGGESTION TO SOMETHING*POSSIBLE WELL KNOWN PERSON NAME DROP*HINT TOWARDS INSANE EVENT WITH NO DETAILS GIVEN". Then its accompanied by a non-descript picture or a photo where you can tell the important stuff is just outside the frame.
Its like a small child shouting and jumping, "LOOK AT ME!" "CLICK ON ME!" "EVERYONE ELSE CLICKED, YOU SHOULD TOOOOOOO!"

and that stuff about the smoking, I am sure the same guy had an article around the time of the big smoking ban kerfuffle saying how cool smoking was and why people should start smoking.

I would be a lot more inclined to read the article if it said something like
-Oh Andy, you've got a lot of explaining to do...
On Twitter Andy Murray joked about marrying his girlfriend sparking a media frenzy - and might have caused him trouble with Kim Sears.  Read more »

But I have just realised that if you have all the articles spelled out for you at the start that they aren't.......actually......news, or interesting, or any of our business. Then, by the time you have got to anything that is important, you are too bored or annoyed at the rest to even notice it. Lets try another few -

-Son's surprise gift leaves his Mum in tears
Mike Harris gave his Mum tickets to the superbowl... and videoed it.
Click for some unknown reason»

-'Carol Vorderman's charity plan is insanity'
'Martin Shaw thinks its a bad idea for Carol to fly solo round the world to raise money for something.  Click here for less details? »
Not an article about the fact that she wants to do it, an article about a actor who is a pilot saying it is insane. The article doesn't even tell you what she is raising money for.
It also tags a tiny article on the bottom -"in other news, here is something completely unrelated." Haha And now for Something Completely Different.

And they aren't even written by writers! they say they were "written by our blogger", anyone can be a blogger, kids can be bloggers, I'm a fuckin blogger for blogfuck sake!
Writers have to actually write, deliver the facts, give us new information. Bloggers can write anything they want, it doesn't have to be true, or make ...sense... or........
I'm answering my own questions, aren't I?
Yes.
Should I go on?
No.

Yahoo, please change the name of your "Yahoo! News" section to just "Yahoo! Stuff".
If you could then add a "Yahoo! News" section which have important headlines that I can skim over when I check my emails.
Ta.


A A

Spontaiousicus Instantanicus

Breast Obsessed!
Every where you look they are there. Adverts, news, shops, quite clearly they are on women.. duh, on peoples clothes, you cant escape. They are just there. "Quick look away!" oh wait there are more there! They way they make clothes too, "here... have a bag... oh that... no, don't worry, that's just the strap that goes over your shoulder and completely accentuates the shape of them."
"ah yes madam, this t shirt has been very popular... the owl/bird/picture/slogan is doing very well... yes the 2 round parts of the design are exactly where your boobs are and will of course draw attention right to them. Enjoy"

Why do they have ladies in their underwear to advertise underwear, its not like they are trying to appeal to men. "Hey Big bOy, you would look as sexy as me in these tights, Mwa" (that's like that slow kissing sound when they mouth it, you know moowa, moowa. go back and read that line again but use the sound of a kiss noise at the end not just em double-you a. it sounds better that way)

Shapely....

*sigh*


A A - look, A A looks like Madonna-pointy-boobie-thing. (*everywhere*)

I heard a rumour that 2014 is actually a man in a 2014's clothes

Its true, the complete truth, you cant deny it, I definitely heard a rumour.
Doesn't mean the rumour is true but I heard it.

What is more unbelievable is the fact that its 2014, its like time is getting faster as we get older but then I got to thinking. Time is based on the passage of events in the past all leading up the the present... or are they. Is there really a past, present and future?
We look at the sun and we see it about what?  8 minutes in the past? anyway, its not actually where we are looking, some of the stars we see in the night sky could actually have died and we are seeing their light from thousands of years ago, so the further away we look the further back in time we see. If we looked through a telescope at a mirror a long, long way off in space we could see the dinosaurs instead of ourselves on the earth. WHAT!? Imagine if there was already a mirror somewhere out there! We could actually look back into the past and find out what really happened at some of the hugely significant events of our time. But there isn't a mirror out there and probably not a powerful enough telescope.
What if we sent mirrors out now so in the future they could look back to the past.

So you can look back into the past but you cant travel back to the past. If you could travel back in time it would already have happened. To travel back in time you would have to... travel slower than the speed of light? No wait, it would be travel faster than the speed of light :S
If something happens faster than light it means it will happen before we can observe it... if you have a button that, when pressed, instantly makes a bell ding and the process happens faster than the speed of light then the bell will ding quicker than instantly, like before you have pressed the button! What would happen if the bell dinged and you didn't press the button PPPOOOOWWW! end of world.

All my comprehension is based on our reality that is based on light, the beginning of our time is measured by light. The entire universal knowledge is around the rules of how things act and behave within the laws of light. If there are things that exist faster than light then they would be separate from our time, they can move before we can understand that they have done so. Superman, he can move a super speed. He can walk, jog, run and move at super speed. Can he walk, jog and run at different super speeds too? Can he stand still at super speed? If Superman as running at normal speed but then wanted to change to super speed would he still be running at the same speed but everything else slowed down, if not then he would probably run through things, imagine trying to dodge things at super speed, CRASH, BANG, BOOF. If he actually slowed down time instead of went super speed then the super speed is only what we see. If it took you three hours to run X amount miles then it would still take Superman 3 hours to run that same distance but to him the world was frozen still and to an observer he travelled super fast. Poor thing.
Oh yeah, light speed travelling, I haven't even thought about travelling slower than the speed of light, then you would go forward in time, right? Cryogenics, frozen so you wake up in the future, to us the correct amount of time has passed but Walt Disney has already got his hover-board and robot body. To him, the moment of freezing and unfreezing would be instantaneous. That is the closest to slower than the speed of light I can think of. Unconsciousness, sleeping, time travels quicker that way.
There is a way to work forward time travel into our lives, it is a very mental process. (mental and mental). If you make a very prominent memory of the exact moment in time you are in, take a note of smells, sounds, location, people you are with, everything you can and that is your start point, this is the present. Now say for example you wanted to travel forward a week, just go about your week as normal and try not to think about, then when the day has come you wanted to travel to simply think back to your start point remembering the details as clear as they were at that point, that present and then realise that you are now in the present but a week later. The time between the 2 points has past in what seems like an instant. I know it sounds like a dose of crap "oorg, I have to actually experience the whole week, its not really time travel", well no its not but the effect is the same, try it, actually give it all your attention creating that start point and realising how little time seems to have passed when you do it.
I noticed this when I was passing the High School I used to go to and I remembered passing it when I was still in first school and at that moment all the time in between that, going to Middle School, High School and College just seemed to pass instantly. Superman, travelling normal running speed while the earth stands still for him, if he flew round the world he has to take all the time to do it. It's just faster than us. That's if he does slow down time, he might just know where building and things are, urg, imagine if he just flew at super speed through the person you were talking to, splat.

If we were travelling faster than the speed of light everything would just be red because infra-red is faster than white light, then ultra-violet is faster than infa-red and so on through the spectrum. Then you kept going all the way to the end of the spectrum and everything was just milk...


A A

In the Land of the Blind...

In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king.

Why would the fact that he has one eye make him the king of the land of the blind? Blind people still have eyes but they can't see, this would mean that their king is a blind man with only one eye whereas the rest of the blind people still have two.
Unless they mean that "in the land of the blind the one eyed man - who can see, is king" but that may as well say "in the land of the blind the person who can see is king."
Can he actually see? That means he shouldn't be in the land of the blind, he should be in the land of the people-who-can-see or even the land of the one-eyed-people or land of the partially-sighted. Did he sneak in and take over? Or was he voted for. Maybe it was pure chance, they all voted and it just so happened that the blind man they elected only had one eye. Would it be through vote that they chose a king or would it be royal decent? Is blindness hereditary? If so maybe the royal blood line has its sight back, come to think of it - if there were people living there in families surely as the population grows people are born with their sight. Unless the land is cursed and everyone is born blind except the royal family who can see but only have one eye. That would make it more of a statement of fact -
"Hey Ted, did you know that In the land of the Blind, the One Eyed man is King?"
Possibly when everyone is born they are taken to whatever land they belong - the blind, the deaf etc. each one is perfectly tailored for each person the land of the blind is soft and everything is organised be what it feels like and everything tells you what it is. The land of the deaf has writing on everything.
THAT'S IT!! - the blind people need to be watched over because they can't see where they are so to keep an eye on them there are cameras everywhere - the one eyed man is a camera! Each camera has a speaker in and if there is a problem the person watching will call out to the blind person to help them. BOOM! Dissected and solved.
The whole world has been split up into different lands, each with its own very specific purpose. The rulers of the world keep a check on each person and assign them to whichever land is best for them.

Well, not really. That's just some fantasy world I made up to go with the saying.
I guess its just another flawed saying we still use. The meanings I found behind it are -

1. Among others with a disadvantage or disabilty, the one with the mildest disadvantage or disability is regarded as the greatest
2. Even someone without much talent or ability is considered special by those with no talent or ability at all

Which still doesn't make sense, having one eye is still a far far greater advantage than being blind. Bad comparison.

I still like the idea of the world with different lands for different people... could make an interesting story. It sure looks it in my head.

A A