I can't believe I survived this

I have survived a lot of horrible things in my life. But nothing comes close to the book State of Fear by Michael Crichton. This may be the most tedious book I've ever read, and that's coming from a guy who read Deception Point just a few months ago. Dan Brown comes off as a master craftsman compared to this stupid piece of pathetic trash.

The greatest lie in this book is in the blurb. It says: "...the novel races forward on a roller-coaster thrill ride..."

The only thing thrilling about this book is that if needed it is thick enough to be used to beat the living shit out of any Yale President that might hate your blog. And as for racing forward... Bull-fucking shit!

Now I realize that blurb is often a description of the book the publisher wishes for purposes of marketing and sales, but this is by far the most calculated and vile exaggeration perpetrated on the readers anywhere or any time. There is absolutely no way a book can "race forward" when nearly three fourths of the books 571 pages are dedicated to people droning on and on, preaching their views on global warming and other environmental issues but doing so in the most unimaginative and uninteresting way possible.

Mr. Crichton sends his characters around the globe in search of radical environmentalists who happen to be in far away places in order to allow his characters to have lots of time to rehash the same old arguments, spout facts, and drone on and on and on, killing any momentum his plot (unoriginal as it may be) may have gained in the previous chapter when one of his 'heroes" shuts up for long enough to actually do something. But even then they have to talk about it.

This book could be cut down to about a hundred pages and it still wouldn't be that great. And if there is a point to this book it is lost in the tedium, which is so painful I feel like I may have to investigate litigation against Mr. Crichton for the physical pain reading his book has caused me.

If I need to spend several hours listening to blowholes spout their opinions, I'll stick to Fox News.

never joke about the Titanic

CNN.COM is reporting that researchers have discovered evidence in the form of a fragment on the sea floor that indicates the Titanic sank with greater rapidity than previously believed. Details of the find will be revealed in a History Channel documentary airing Feb 26.

As interesting as this seems to be for those involved, it would appear that not everyone shares their enthusiasm.

Among the unimpressed is one Robert Ballard. You may know him as the man who actually discovered the wreck of the "unsinkable" ship back in 1985. "They found a fragment, big deal," Ballard said. "Am I surprised? No. When you go down there, there's stuff all over the place. It hit an iceberg and it sank. Get over it."

If you follow the rich history of the Titanic you will be interested to note that the exact location of the fragment is of some import, as it seems to have been shoved up Mr. Ballard's Ass.

If you suspect I embelished Mr. Ballard's remarks (I'm talking to you Mr. Levin), feel free to peruse this link at your convenience http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/science/12/05/titanic.find.ap/index.html

mysteries of the universe

Why is it that some people think being from California automatically makes them more interesting than everyone else? Are there really people who are impressed by this?

Why am I compelled to stop everything I'm doing in order to watch You've Got Mail any time I happen to flip past it on television? If I saw the DVD on the Bargain rack I wouldn't spend five bucks to buy it. I am never interested in renting it. But if I am flipping through the channels and I see it on, no matter how far along the movie happens to be, life grinds to a screeching halt until the credits roll.

I wonder why people tell me I’m funny or interesting or intelligent. I wonder why I can never truly believe the nice things people say about me. I wonder what it would be like if I could believe all the good things people said about me for a whole day. What kind of difference would it make?

Why do I tolerate idiots? Is it because I have no choice?

Why is it that I avoid human contact as much as I possibly can, yet I find the check lanes at the grocery stores that allow me to do everything muself morally reprehensible? Why?

How come certain people can’t imagine living a good life without any expectation of some kind of reward in a life hereafter? To me, being good strictly for a reward seems a little disingenuous. I’m sure there are some people who might consider their perceived reward as a fringe benefit.

Am I really supposed to believe that Yale President Richard Levin has nothing better to do with his spare time that to bad mouth my blog? Will I ever be good enough for you Richard?!

I’m not a big fan of seafood. For the most part I’ll eat it or at least try it, but its not anywhere close to my favorite and never will be. By seafood I mean salmon, cod, lobster, shrimp, etc. Yet there is nothing closer to the divine in my opinion than sushi. If there is heaven, then it comes served on a wooden board with wasabi and pickled ginger.

Why can’t I update my blog? Is it related to the fact that I wouldn’t write anything here that I wouldn’t want to read somewhere else, but have spent too much time reading things elsewhere that the only things I never have time to write anything here except for things I wouldn’t want to read anywhere.

Why didn't that last sentence make any sense?