Useless Theories

I have a theory about those same people. They avoid traffic lights by zipping through urban neighborhoods (like mine). They feel they have to prove that this is faster than waiting for the light, so they jump into traffic without stopping properly and without much regard to oncoming traffic. Me, I prefer the light.

You wanna hear my rant on the tyranny of the goddam meek?

yes

It'll have to be after work then. It' long and VERY passionate.

I hate the meek.

two yesses.

a wabbit want would be wather entewtaining wight about now...

Come the revolution, I'm putting the meek up against the wall and shooting them.

<snort>

The general theory is that if the lights are timed for 30 mph, they are also timed for 60 mph.

Wadda pussy, or wadda wabbitt ...

Can't you think of something more heinous?

Depends where you are. That works for long stretches like you have in NM. But, my FRAKING neighborhood just made all the lights with no right turn on red and a required crosswalk between light changes even if no pedestrian has pushed the cross button.

Grrrrr. Required crosswalk with no pedestrians is as bad as the protected right turn arrow when nobody is turning.

The 60mph theory doesn't work, in case you were planning to try it.

Therory.

The faster you drive the less time you are in one place, therefore reducing the chance of road accidents.

And on a washboard dirt road, the faster you go, the smoother the ride. You're not in contact with the road long enough to feel the bumps.

This one works, but for a different reason.

Here's a useless theory about conferences: When an A2K member attends one, the number of posts he writes in any given 15 minutes is inversely proportional to the quality of the talk given at this time..

Bet I could guess who is in a tedious conference about now.

You're a good theorist, Roger!

Pegion Hole revised:- When there are m males and n young females in a pub andf if n < m then after a couple of months the chances are that there exists one out of n females wondering who "really" got her pregnent that night.

Hmmmm… now I'm super-motivated to conduct field research in pubs.

Unexamined brainwave while reading the NYT Sunday mag story on homosexuality in animals: "Homosexuality is an adaptation to monogamy."

Unexamined so I need to come back to it. But I was thinking of that monogamous guy gull who spread out his genes to a lesbian gull (who was in her own monogamous relationship) while maintaining his own monogamous relationship too. Lesbian gulls: monogamous. Hetero gulls: also monogamous. All the heavy lifting of a monogamous relationship + child-rearing: done by the monogamous pair(s). But lesbian gulls want babies too, so a little boinkety boink outside of the pair relationship and guy gull gets to have babies by two different females.

It'd be only one of a few... "causes"? "reasons"?, including trust/bonding and the uncle effect.

The article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/04/magazine/04animals-t.html

This is a true story from the academic world. A graduate student in psychology was working part time as a teaching assisstant. He administered a test to a class and gave out pencils to each student. After the test, most of the male students returned the pencils. Many female students did not return pencils. The graduate student wrote a paper using this incident as support of Freud's theory of penis envy.