Chez Watt Winners 2002

Back to Chez Watt Home

(Clicking on the date will take you to that month's complete ballot of nominations)

it would seem to me that 5/0 = 5. Or, in other words, there is
nothing to divide 5 by, so therefore, it remains 5. What's wrong with

04JUN02: [What this is sung to the tune of is left as an exercize for the reader.]
I am the very model of a modern Homo sapiens,
I've information cultural, religious, and technician,
I know the things of kinship, and I quote the fights historical,
From ancestor to de-scen-dant, in order categorical;
I'm very well acquainted too with matters semiotical,
I understand all languages, both simple and the gutteral,
About my fellow sapiens I'm happy to select and choose -
With cheerful acceptance that the many do outweigh the few.
With cheerful acceptance that the many do outweigh the few
With cheerful acceptance that the many do outweigh the few
With cheerful acceptance that the many do outweigh the few
I'm very good at politics and xenophobic racialism,
I know the ruling powers and to whom I owe my altruism;
In short, in matters spiritual, cultural and apeient,
I am the very model of a modern Homo sapiens.
In short, in matters spiritual, cultural and apeient,
He is the very model of a modern Homo sapiens
I know my etiologies, both myth and genealogies
I seek out final answers in the form of ideologies,
I quote the mots of wisdom of the anc-i-ent philosophers
And follow after anyone who makes a better offerer.
I can tell undoubted differences in ethnic clans and classes,
I know correct behaviour when some people act like arses,
I am very well aware of all the latest in high fashion and,
I sell all kinds of goods by making everything seem passionate.
And sell all kinds of goods, etc.
I have more gods than dogs have fleas, and some they even bite as much.
I call a man a heretic if his belief ain't quite as much.
I organise great armies for to murder and to rapiens
I am the very model of a modern Homo sapiens.
For my scientific knowledge, though I'm clever and inventive,
Has been only taught most widely to the limits of invective;
But still, in matters cultural, religious, and technician,
I am the very model of a modern Homo sapiens.

The most common of these new methods amongst the land mammals that
arise after the fall of the dinosaurs is sexual reproduction.

Third, for all of those who claimed that my post was incoherent or
"dumb", why were their at least 2 intelligent posts made?

"SETI is based on the simple assumption that nature operates
elsewhere the same way it does here. ID is based on the assumption
that nature doesn't even work here."

[>>> = OP]
>>>of course, that would mean the ultimate product of the prosecution, the
>>>ultimate army men, weren't imperial, and they weren't imperial
>>>themselves, requires humbleness, something counterproductive to
It's a truly virtuoso display of gibberish, even by OP's lofty
standards. I think my favorite part is that free-floating verb phrase,
"requires humbleness"; you're reading along, eyes to the ground,
as it were, carefully following the syntactic steps, and suddenly
"requires humbleness" leaps out at you like a panther from the
pansy bed. How did it get there? Where is its antecedent, its
referent? How can we tether it to anything else in the sentence?
Then, of course, mildly disoriented, we go back and examine the
earlier parts of the sentence and find ourselves even more adrift;
"imperial"? Another OP'ism, we knew that already, another
example of using a word that means something vaguely similar
to what he's trying to say; but what, exactly, could he have been
after? How close to "imperial" should we search for the real meaning?
Are we in the realm of political discourse here? History? Sociology?
Or just somewhere in the trackless wastes of OP's ongoing lampoon
of philosophy? Sadly, OP gives us no more clues. Unlike "free will"
or "energy field", "imperial" is unglossed in the lexicon of AJ's
private vocabulary.
Yet the reader presses on, impelled by the nagging sense that
it looks so much like English, there must be a message there.
What about context, then? Who is being described? "The ultimate
army men" - the astronauts, perhaps? Are we talking about
astronauts? The reader grasps at this straw. To no avail, though;
there are still "they themselves" to account for, and the whole
family of questions about the prosecution, and its product, and
whether some sort of assertion is being made about capitalism,
or whether, like humbleness, capitalism is simply flotsam on
OP's stream of consciousness. Tantalizing possibilities of
meaningful associations float before the reader's eyes -
imperial capitalism? The prosecution themselves? - linking
and unlinking like Kekule's snakes, but never taking stable
I stand in awe. I've seen a lot of nonsense on the net in my
time, but this is world-class.

01NOV02 [Note: >>> = victim, >> = the actual Chez Watt, > = the nominating post]:
>>> I have been trained in tensor calculus, partial derivatives
>>> and advanced statistics and probability. I will happily
>>> differentiate anything you throw at me.
>> Fact from fantasy?
>That's it! Game over man! GAME OVER!

chance? Is probability and statistics based on chance?

Chez Watt Home 2006 2005 2004 2003