The opposite of Sagan

27 October 2009
By Tom Mansell

This woman is an optometrist.

Assumedly, this woman has been through 13 years of education up to high school and 4 years of college, including a year each of chemistry, organic chemistry, biology, higher math, and physics.

This woman has been to optometry school for 4 years and certified to practice optometry.

Assumedly, patients come to her office in the interest of vision health, vision correction, and early detection and prevention of eye diseases. They entrust their ability to see to her.

You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video

….

….

How did this happen?

If you understood this the first time, go back and listen to it again.

PS: Does this remind you of any descriptions you may have heard about wine?

Discovered on Pharyngula, a worthwhile science/evolution defending blog.

Digg This
Reddit This
Stumble Now!
Buzz This
Vote on DZone
Share on Facebook
Bookmark this on Delicious
Kick It on DotNetKicks.com
Shout it
Share on LinkedIn
Bookmark this on Technorati
Post on Twitter
Google Buzz (aka. Google Reader)

6 Responses to The opposite of Sagan

  1. Julien Marchand on 27 October 2009 at 9:31 pm

    Man…. I can’t find any words in english to explain how bad this is.

    And I can’t even drown this in wine because today is a root-day and my wine does not taste anything… Wait.. :-(

  2. [...] The opposite of Sagan « Ithacork: Wine and Science in the Finger Lakes ithacork.wordpress.com/2009/10/27/the-opposite-of-sagan – view page – cached Assumedly, this woman has been through 13 years of education up to high school and 4 years of college, including a year each of chemistry, organic chemistry, biology, higher math, and physics. — From the page [...]

  3. Lenn Thompson on 28 October 2009 at 4:30 pm

    Right? Okay.

    Right? Okay.

    I couldn’t even get through this.

  4. Tom Mansell on 28 October 2009 at 4:36 pm

    at least try to make it to the part about bombs and dog poop. (about 5:00)

  5. Peter Bell / Fox Run on 29 October 2009 at 12:08 pm

    She should try this talk in front of a less gullible audience and see how far she gets before the rotten tomatoes start flying.

    Even before getting into the totally stupid extra-logic stuff, she pretty much damns herself by saying that the mass part of E = mc exp2 is infinitesimally small. This means that as m approaches zero, the whole right side of the equation (mc exp2) approaches zero. Hmmm.

  6. Hans WP on 30 October 2009 at 11:12 am

    All I can say is…WTF?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

More in Tasting Notes (5 of 5 articles)