Powered by ScribeFire.
Powered by ScribeFire.
Powered by ScribeFire.
Grasa o mersa en Argentina, naco en México, hortera en España, ordinario en cualquier país, eso es lo que pienso de Ricardo Arjona. Me parece un individuo tan pringoso, que si por casualidad se diera una ducha provocaría una catástrofe ecológica que ríase del Exxon Valdez. No me gusta como canta, sus melodías no tienen ni siquiera la simplicidad y la alegría que permita ser motivo de solaz en casamientos y fiestas de cumpleaños. Cuando desgraciadamente su excesiva difusión me expone a sus balidos me siento cubierto por una sustancia cochambrosa y dulzona, como si fuera un candidato a la presidencia obligado por la exigencias de la campaña a besar niños atiborrados de manzanas cubiertas de caramelo.Beto M responde:
Bugman: te me adelantaste! yo planeaba redactar un post sobre lo ridículamente naco que son las letras de las canciones de Arjona, con metáforas pseudoprofundoas y dizque inteligentes que le funcionan con la gran masa, pero que en realidad son insultos a la inteligencia común.Y yo estoy al punto de decir que "metáforas pseudoprofundas" es todo un elogio inmerecido para el artista... En sus canciones prácticamente NUNCA aparece una metáfora, sus letras son más bien: similes pseudoprofundos salpicados con metáforas ordinarias y a lo sumo burdas ó toscas... Mantengo firmemente mis siguientes opiniones:
"The human population of planet Earth is, in effect, maxed out on its credit cards and soon will have problems paying the mortgage. Unless concerted global efforts are made to address these mounting problems, GEO-4 concludes that we shall shortly pass the point of no return."
The authors—388 scientists reviewed by roughly 1,000 of their peers—view the report as "an urgent call for action" and decry the "woefully inadequate" global response to problems such as climate change. "The amount of resources needed to sustain [humanity] exceeds what is available," the report declares.
"The systematic destruction of the earth's natural and nature-based resources has reached a point where the economic viability of economies is being challenged," Achim Steiner, UNEP's executive director, said in a statement. "The bill we hand our children may prove impossible to pay."
Nothing like stirring the pot--not to mention selling books--with an incendiary claim, in this case that one race is intellectually superior to another. Dr. Watson, we presume? Bingo. World-renowned geneticist James Watson, 79, who shared the 1962 Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine for his role in helping break the DNA code, is being widely criticized after telling The Sunday Times of London that he's "inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa" because "all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours--whereas all the testing says not really." He went on, reports the newspaper, to say that "people who have to deal with black employees find...it is not true" that all humans are equal.
The Independent reports today that Watson is currently on a swing through Britain to publicize his latest book Avoid Boring People: Lessons from a Life in Science due out next week in which he apparently makes similar such claims. "There is no firm reason to anticipate that the intellectual capacities of peoples geographically separated in their evolution should prove to have evolved identically," the London newspaper quotes from the upcoming book. "Our wanting to reserve equal powers of reason as some universal heritage of humanity will not be enough to make it so."
As you can see with the Home DNA test kit soon to be out, the last thing humanity needs is to fuel fascism...
Then again, doing an actual study and concluding once and for all, race does not determine intelligence would be very useful! Just as studies point out that race does not determine height... I mean science should not be scared of taboos, in my opinion scientists, or science in general, has a very delicate subject in its hands...
From a comment to the apology article:
When scientists are influenced by the fear of being labeled as racist, politically incorrect, socially inappropriate, or any of a multitude of other labels an often overly sensitive public is poised to slap onto them at first sign of error, they stop being scientists and start being 'yes men' to political correctness. Whatever Watson's intent in making the statements he was quoted as making, the net effect of those statements will be for all scientists to check their scientific results against what they perceive the public wants to hear. To me, this is just a feeding frenzy on scientific opinion at the expense of an open scientific forum. Given Watson's peer group's inclination towards political correctness over scientific pursuit, maybe he should have devoted his life to comedy instead. Obviously his peer group's priority is whether Watson can make them feel good as opposed to Watson's contribution to the mundane, such as genetics.
"Microsoft's OOXML did not get enough votes to be approved the first time around in ISO/IEC — notwithstanding the fact that many countries joined the Document Format and Languages committee in the months before voting closed, almost all of them voting to approve OOXML. Unfortunately, many of these countries also traded up to 'P' level membership at the last minute to gain more influence. Now the collateral damage is setting in. At least 50% of P members must vote (up, down, or abstain) on every standard at each ballot — and none of the new members are bothering to vote, despite repeated pleas from the committee chair. Not a single ballot has passed since the OOXML vote closed. In the chairman's words, the committee has 'ground to a halt.' Sad to say, there's no end in sight for this (formerly) very busy and influential standards committee."
