scottsimpson.net

Stupidity

So I couldn't help noticing today, whilst standing in line at Starbucks for my morning coffee-thing and muffin-thing, the girls in front of me whom, between the two of them, used the word 'definately' at least fifty times before reaching the cash register. "He definately called me at like 2am" "You definately asked him not to smoke around you" "I definately want a jalapeno bagel" (ew?!) "i definately didn't go to class this morning" -- it must be nice to be so certain about so many things. This is one of my pet peeves, for anyone that hasn't noticed ... misusing words can sometimes be charming (Shakespeare, two-year-olds, foreigners), but people enrolled in a University ought to know better. The same principle applies for editors of major news sources--according to CNN.com, the Mars Rover today begins its 'decent from [the] summit'. I stared at the headline for a few seconds, trying to figure out what was meant by it -- sometimes the overzealous abbreviation that editors use for headlines isn't immediately forthcoming to the reader -- but then I realized that this was not, indeed the case, and it was, indeed, the case that whoever edited the article is a moron. Further down in the article, the proper word, 'descent', is used. Check it out here.

In other news, it bothers me greatly that people complain on an annual basis when their house is wrecked by Big Weather. I'm not talking about Katrina-style stuff (at least, not entirely), but rather about the people that live in the same place for 37 years, see at least 37 hurricanes, and then seem indignant when one damages their roof or kills their cat. It also perplexes me that people enjoy living in muggy heat. One might argue that my statement does not escape the criticism that earthquakes operate in much the same way. But they don't. Hurricanes happen annually between certain times, in certain specific areas. Earthquakes (meaningful ones, at least) happen much less often and typically cause much less damage. Another aspect of the hurricane thing that bugs me is the number of deaths 'blamed' on these weather events. We have fairly sophisticated Large Computers and Men That Stand In Front Of Magic Screens that can tell us with uncanny certainty when and if such a hurricane will touch land. If someone has three days advance warning, and does not take precautions such as, I don't know, taking an impromptu vacation, and then they up and get killed by a flying tree when they go outside to water the plants in a 100mph windstorm ... well, maybe that's Darwin rearing his bearded head. I mean, seriously. To my knowledge, the NOAA supercomputers are seldom wrong, and even if the man with the bad tie that gets paid to point at a greenscreen is a little bit wrong about the morning fog sometimes, would it not seem prudent to at least pack a bag to be ready to leave if, say, the neighbors start flying by your window? It boggles the mind. And if weather suddenly has moral blameworthiness for the death of someone who didn't heed the warnings (Warning: do not use this toaster in a bath tub!), isn't the weatherman that predicted the thing would make landfall at 5:15AM instead of 4:45AM equally blameworthy? Neither party has any of the characteristics that would give them moral blameworthiness -- they are neither willing participants in the hurricane, nor free to choose the path of the hurricane, nor are either of them breaking some kind of civil code or moral law. I remember a time (vicariously through literature, of course) when a person was responsible for his own safety, at least in terribly obvious cases [there's bad weather coming, maybe we should board up the windows and leave?]. Now it seems everyone wants to blame everything on air currents over the gulf and, I admit I wouldn't be much surprised to see it, the weatherman.

I wish I could sue people for being idiots. I'd be a rich man.