55 Comments

  2. IMAO is a website frequented largely by bored, lazy, mildly humorous individuals who think it is magical to see ones own nattering nonsense displayed on the internet and who also enjoy commenting on the drivel of others, which is often related to some Mel Brooks prattle.

    So please join us.
    You will fit right in.

    11
    Reply to this comment

  5. Funny pictures, sarcasm, the above mentioned intern, sarcasm, music and a plethora of interesting headlines. Did I mention sarcasm? Oh and more than a smattering of Badger references too.

    6
    Reply to this comment

  9. I am so happy to say that your website presents many invaluable insights. Some information is quite esoteric, but still thoughtfully written and compelling. I look forward to more instances of enlightenment.

    5
    Reply to this comment

  14. How would you describe IMAO to someone who has never been to the site?

    Most of you have probably heard the story of the blind men and the elephant. Five blind men were brought up to different parts of an elephant and asked to describe it. One, who touched his ears, said the elephant is like a sail. The one who touched the trunk said an elephant is like a hose. The one who touched the foot said an elephant is like a tree trunk. The one who felt the tusk said an elephant is like a hard smooth stick. The one who touched the tail said–like a rope.
    Now, if a relativist is telling this story, he might describe the blind men as screaming at at one another–you’re wrong, an elephant is not like what you say, he’s like what I say. “These blind men,” says the relativist, “are like absolutists, who think that the truth is just one thing. But,” says the relativist, “the truth here is obviously many things, one thing to one person, one thing to another. The elephant is perceived differently by the different blind men and they are all equally right. There is no single truth independent of perception.”

    The intelligent absolutist, however, says, “Not so fast. Maybe these blind men are equally right as you say, but they are not talking about the same part of the elephant. And they are certainly wrong if they believe that they have adequately described the elephant as a whole. But someone who is not blind realizes that the elephant has several parts. What’s more, the blind person who slides his hands from one part of the elephant anatomy to the others would himself realize the incompleteness of his first description.

    “My point,” says the absolutist, “is that there are better and worse descriptions of the elephant. The description that mentions the different parts as well as how they are put together is better and closer to the truth than the partial truths with which the blind men started. There are objective facts about elephants, and the views that describe more of those objective facts are truer views. Not all views are equal.”

    Sophisticated relativist comeback: “Science is supposed to give us knowledge and truth about things, but in fact what was scientific knowledge in the 18th century about elephants is no longer scientific knowledge. 200 years ago scientists thought that animal species were fixed, that they had always been here and never essentially change. Nowadays, thanks to the theory of evolution, scientists believe that species come into existence, change, and perhaps disappear. The point is that scientific truth is relative to the perceptions of the scientific community, and those change from one generation to the next.”

    The absolutists have an even more sophisticated response to this fairly clever historical relativism. . . . But that is a more advanced topic . . .

    I think that’s a good a description as any. For now.

    2
    Reply to this comment

  21. First, there was this guy named Frank J.
    Then, he was joined by a monkey, a duck, a jew and General Zod.
    Then, there was only General Zod and a guy who had a name no one knew how to pronounce.
    And when they disappeared, it was left to a walrus and whatever an oppo is.

    Oh, and I think there’s an emu somewhere, too.

    6
    Reply to this comment

      • “As to poetry, you know,” said Oppo, stretching out one of his great hands, “I can repeat poetry as well as other folk, if it comes to that—”

        “Oh, it needn’t come to that!” Alice hastily said, hoping to keep him from beginning.

        “The piece I’m going to repeat,” he went on without noticing her remark, “was written entirely for your amusement.”

        Alice felt that in that case she really ought to listen to it, so she sat down, and said “Thank you” rather sadly.

        “In winter, when the fields are white,
        I sing this song for your delight—

        — only I don’t sing it,” he added, as an explanation.

        “I see you don’t,” said Alice.

        “If you can see whether I’m singing or not, you’ve sharper eyes than most,” Oppo remarked severely. Alice was silent.

        “In spring, when woods are getting green,
        I’ll try and tell you what I mean.”

        “Thank you very much,” said Alice.

        1
        Reply to this comment

  24. zzyzx: [after reading all of the above posts] Now who can argue with that? I think we’re all indebted to these IMAO posters for clearly stating what needed to be said. I’m particularly glad that these lovely children were here today to read these posts. Not only were they posted in authentic IMAO gibberish….they expressed a courage little seen in this day and age.

    1
    Reply to this comment

  26. We are . . . the real Rock Ridge. Accept no substitutes. No dimes needed.

    And Ray, if someone asks you if Frank J is a god, you say YES!

    In all the excitement, I can’t remember if Les has won five guitars or six. Or fifty or sixty.

    And don’t call the emu Shirley.

    4
    Reply to this comment

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.