"she died as she lived, hating Michael Moore..." I think that's a bit out of line. We had a discussion on the Orcinus blog about all the virulent hate between liberals and conservatives and the fear that this might get out of control and turn violent. Good discussion, you might wanna read it and think about it when you use words like "hate".

Sob!! Rachel Lucas, rest in peace.

Violence between conservatives and liberals? Who ever said that was a bad thing? Frank J. has always encouraged violence against liberals.
So if using the word "hate" will increase liberal beatings, then hate we hate should hate them hate all hate the hate more hate.

Bet the fear comes from the liberal side.. :)

"Now, a cat lands on its feet because of an innate sense of equilibrium. Buttered bread lands butter side down for the sake of irony. The question is which force is more powerful? To me, the power of irony would only overpower the cat’s sense of equilibrium if someone really intended on eating that bread:"

However, you have to take into account when the floor was last clean and who would have to clean it up. Example: if the floor was freshly mopped, whether or not you wanted to eat the bread wouldn't matter, because the irony of a huge mess all over a freshly mopped floor would compensate....

I'd find it hard to implode while becoming fatter ... wouldn't that be more of an exothermic reaction ala an explosion?

Dan, I believe that what Frnak is saying is that the more we feed Michael Moore, the more massive he becomes until he passes the point where his own internal gravity exceeds his body's ability to maintain its bloated shape, at which point his internal gravity will cause him to implode. And like Frnak said, about one more taco should do it.

Just my two cents worth, for what it's worth. And Frnak, if I'm wrong, don't tell me.

Regarding MM becoming a black hole.
There is a theory that if MM did develop an event horizon, you may have pairs of 'virtual tacos' materialize in the space time surrounding him.
If one of the pair were to appear inside the event horizon, it would be devoured while the other would escape.
In this case MM would seem to be emitting tacos.
Over time the MM black hole thing would evaporate as some of the tacos would actually be negative tacos, or 'socats' as they are known.

poor taco.

No, no, no. You got it all wrong you guys. Michael Moore is a biological heap of useless mass. One must understand biology to make Moore explode instead of implode. First, one must feed the corpulent beast at a constant rate, let's say 2 tacos per minute. Since eukaryotes (animal cells) simply form new cells of fat if one waits to eat another meal, it is necessary to constantly feed. Next, you will need to close all ends that food comes out; yes that's the anus, eyes, ears, and mouth, seal them all. Lastly, insert bacon fat oil intravenously to the body. The result, an exergonic reaction of body parts everywhere. Muwahahahahaha!

Speaking of black holes, have you seen Flawless, with Robert De Niro. I feel as the old marine in the story...
You must see it.

I think there are two important points missing:
First, the idea of strapping your bread to a cat sort of makes the bread less appetizing (the cat is more likely to rub the bottom of your furniture as it goes beneath.)
Secondly, the mass of the butter should be sufficient that if you cover opposite sides of Michael Moore with the stuff, the butter could pull together to crush him. This is much safer than feeding him which would require that you get too close to his maw.

askljhasdjklhasd.. Noooo! She can't be dead!

I wanted more pictures of Sunny and Digger. :(

Well, what if you strapped the cat to one side of MM, and the buttered bread to the other side?
Then drop the assembly from a height of approximately 300 meters onto Barbara Streisand.
This would prove if the butter was stronger than the cat.

I am very sorry to do this, as I hate it when people correct me on petty details, but Frank was misinformed as to the invisibility seeing question. the back of the eye, or the retina, does not in fact reflect light, except in certain situations. Reflection of the entering light is not necessary for vision in any way. On the contrary, the light our photoreceptive cells register is absorbed by the rhodopsin and iodopsin pigments in the cones and rods of the retina. The only case that I know of of an animal using a reflective retina is called reflective tapetum, commonly found in cats, which reflects the light so it passes through the retina twice, enhancing night vision. But humans do not have this. If being invisible would still allow light to be absorbed, but the remaining to continue on, it could work. At least, every time I've been invisiblem, it has worked just fine. but then again, I don't know what kind of ninja technique you use to become invisible. It may be different from mine. let me know if you need any help.

-Brian

Invisibility, I would suppose, would require the absence of both the absorption, and reflection of visible light.
So if the backs of your eyeballs are absorbing light, they would not be invisible. Someone else would see these black spots floating around, get scared and probably run away, making further ninja skills superfluous.

Mike Webster is a bit confused on his theory of relativity. The equation is E = m*(c^2) not E = (mc)^2

However, whichever of the equations is used, if you remove the squared from it and instead double the equation, you'll get exactly what the Great Frank has stated.

Cats + Buttered Bread = perpetual motion machine. Talk about alternative energy sources!

If you put a 6" axle up MM's ass out thru his empty skull, strapped cats and buttered bread around him such that it induces a spinning motion, the flywheel effect would allow unlimited power generation potential.

As a former optician, I can assure you that invisibiltiy has less to do with the effect of light on one's own eyes but more to do with the eyes of the other person. Most important is the fact that the light reflected off of your person should not go into the other individual's eyes at all. To insure that this is the case, you must poke out the other individual's eyes.
In the case of Michael Moore, try to stand in his shadow and there will be insufficient light for you to be seen by anyone.

"Actually, I think we should start a fund to feed Michael Moore until he implodes, sending him random gifts of fatty goods. If it's timed right, he'll suck a bunch of his liberal admirers into the black hole he makes from himself, creating one extremely annoying and obnoxious singularity."

I smell a good random quote

Why waste a good taco on Michael Moore? Can't he just eat a lit stick of dynomite instead?

See, I think that if you're talking about the dual between irony and equilibrium, clearly one cannot defeat the other.
To satisfy equilibrium, the cat would land on its feet.
To satisfy irony, it would have to become a Liberal to do so.

Of course Michael could eat a stick of dynamite. Especially if someone put a dab of guacamole on it and told him that it was a flauta.

O so you think you will win this game? well i have braking news for you Rasta will come out winner this time and when he does he is gonna rub it in your face so bad that he beat a 23 year old and he's only 15!!!!

That last one was from me!!!

Frank, you asked for additional math and science questions.....you got it.

I would like to hear your opinion on something that has bothered me for a long time.

Let's say that Pythagoras, instead of stating that the sum of a squared and b squared, would be equal to c squared (damn I wish this message board did superscripts so I could use exponents), decided instead that, a squared plus b squared would be equal to..... say, q squared. Here's my question: How would that change the way that engineers and designers have chosen to use structural support mechanisms in various construction projects throughout history? Would this simple matter have changed the course of human history? This has really been bothering me.

Sticky B from WT (that's West Texas to all y'all)

Regarding the combining of cats, butter, and Micheal Moore, my question is this.

1)If you through a pound of butter up Mike's ass, how far would it travel before it greased a side.

2) If you threw a cat up Mike's ass.....I don't know anyone that could be that cruel.....to cats.

3)Is Mike in good enough shape to pull a greasy string out of a sick cat's ass, or would he have to call time out and catch his breath?

PS. Just so y'all know, I'm embarassed that Natalie Maines is from Lubbock.

Sticky B, already, sometimes people say a^2 + b^2 = h^2 (h for hypotenuse!) Certainly using q^2 would have changed history because no one would have taken the guy seriously in the first damn place. q^2? Phht.

I know a black Ho.

Oh!!! You meant ASTRO Physics...never mind.

Actually, "m*(c^2)" is implied when you say "mc^2."

Frank, I'm a fan of your site, but Rachel Lucas is my niece. Your comment that she is dead, etc. was in very poor taste.

I bet Rachel thought it was funny though!

Regarding question #2. I happen to work for H&R Block...

Official line: you should report any income you receive to the IRS just to be completely legal. One of the few exceptions is family gifts under certain amounts.

Reality: If the IRS can't prove that you have it, i.e.--if none of the donors report that they gave it to you...they really can't do anything.

Ok so....
1. What if we put the said bread on MM, and threw that off of a building?
2. When does MM's mass start affecting earths gravitational pull (reference planetoid inter-reactions) because this could be a serious problem with tides and he would not only ruin America with his blatant stupidity but also the earth!

Nice site.