Below is a chronology of our experiments with Peeps, those fun colored sugar confections that appear every year around Easter. Remember, we were at work. :-) Here are the emails that summed up our experiments. Identities have been concealed to protect the innocent and integrity of the research.
Official experiment log and responses of the Peep-ologists at company XYZ
March 9, 2009
Entry 1: Initial Experiment 9:30AM
These are the official findings of the “Peep” in the Microwave experiment:
The peep was placed on a paper plate and inserted into the microwave on Medium High for 30 seconds.
There was little or no change in first ten seconds. The peep then began to “puff” up. It stayed rather small for another 5 seconds and then came the dramatic change. The peep become “engorged” and swelled to massive proportions. Seeping beyond the sugar coating and becoming roasted on the inside.
The peep was removed with about 5 seconds remaining.
After viewing the results of the experiment, the participants consumed the peep commenting on the fact that it tasted better than if it had not been “Nuked”. The real drawback to the flavor was that the outside sugar coating got hard and really tasted bad.
So, in conclusion, peeps are good roasted if you can do away with the sugar coating and they are great fun to watch them swell into a massive lump, particularly if you are with a great group of people!!
These official findings will never be published beyond this email. So, don’t go looking for it in a science journal!
Entry 2: News release 10:00AM
Breaking news...in an unprecedented scientific experiment, held in Funsville, USA, peep research specialist Wisp (2009) identified the molecular constitution of the wingless bird. While the Wisp (2009) research demonstrated the breaking point of a peep, further studies are necessary to determine if the Chick Peep's cousin, Rabbit Peep, is made of the same stuff. The lingering question: Will a rabbit peep crack under the same nuclear pressure?
Reference:
Wisp, P. (2009). Personal demonstration of peep show. Company XYZ Kitchen; 3rd Floor.
Entry 3: Competing Theory
Bardin, a burgeoning peep-ologist, theorizes that the Rabbit Peep research will yield similar results to the Chic Peep experiments, performed by Wisp in 2009, with one major difference. Bardin’s theory states that the shape of the Rabbit Peep, while being bombarded internally by microwaves, will expand in a manner that has a higher level of hilari-ous-itude than the Chic Peep. Plus, and perhaps more importantly, there is the finite possibility that the remains of the Bunny Peep will without explanation, end up cradled between two flat, flour based, crunchy confections, with a small bar of processed, hydrogenated, sweetened and solidified product of the coco bean, after which it will miraculously disappear.
Entry 4: Official Findings Phase I, March 9, 2009 10:30AM
The Rabbit Peep experiment brought about drastic changes in the development of marshmallow expansion.
The circumstances and preparations were all consistent with the “chick” peep test. The same temperature was used as was the same microwave, leaving little to question as to the final results.
The microwave was set on medium high for 30 seconds. The rabbit peep began to expand into a massive mess of marshmallow within five seconds. The experiment was stopped at 20 seconds as the peep expanded and began to shrink.
Participants were mixed in their judgment as to which peep tasted better!
Missing from both experiments was chocolate and grahams, which would have added a new dimension to the overall outcome of in this experiment of “Peepology”
Further experiments will be conducted to determine the merging ability of two different peeps. It could solve the age old question as to which came first the chick peep or the bunny peep and which will best stand the test of time!!
Entry 5: Future research
New Peep-ologists are looking to expand Peep research even further. One researcher stated, "I am so excited about this research and wish to join the research team with a new project. Flaming the 'Peep' over open fire."
Is there more to come? Only the future will tell.
Thursday, April 09, 2009
Friday, March 20, 2009
Rant: New home buyer $7500 loan in 2008 vs. $8000 for free in 2009
This is bull! The government is so stupid. Those people who made responsible decisions don't get any kind of break. I am ready to find a job where I will be let go so I can collect unemployment, which will allow me to get a loan modification for a lower interest rate, and a free $8000 from the government.
I don't' mind the $7500 "loan" in 2008 but it is Bull that the government is giving $$$ that doesn't have to be paid back in 2009. Not only are they handing people free money to buy a house (unlike the responsible citizens in this country), but they are giving it to people who are going to gain the most equity immediately in their homes if the market does rebound. I am all for giving them a loan, but with no repayment. We are already a trillion dollars in debt as a country. Oh my God, when is it going to stop.
No wonder the housing crisis happened. Our government is a horrendous example of fiscal responsibility. Our government is sending the message to the general public, there are more benefits than consequences if you set other people up to fail. Just wait for your neighbor to screw up.
Additionally, look at how much we are spending. We are spending money we simply do not have! I don't understand how that teaches the American people anything. Basically, if you don't have the money, borrow it and then more and more, it will be okay. I am sorry, isn't that why we are in this predicament in the first place. People were living beyond their means, now our government is living beyond its means. Even if we taxed every person making more than 100,000 dollars a year at 50%, I don't think we would be able to pay back the debt we are incurring, particularly when we are taking that tax and giving it away for free to people who barely contribute to the tax fund anyway. We are not a socialist country and I don't want to be. I wish I could decide who to help and who not to help. I am a bleeding hard liberal most of the time... but damn it, this is just stupid. Maybe it is time that I turn into a republican, because even though they may screw the little person, they make people work for their benefits at least.
I don't' mind the $7500 "loan" in 2008 but it is Bull that the government is giving $$$ that doesn't have to be paid back in 2009. Not only are they handing people free money to buy a house (unlike the responsible citizens in this country), but they are giving it to people who are going to gain the most equity immediately in their homes if the market does rebound. I am all for giving them a loan, but with no repayment. We are already a trillion dollars in debt as a country. Oh my God, when is it going to stop.
No wonder the housing crisis happened. Our government is a horrendous example of fiscal responsibility. Our government is sending the message to the general public, there are more benefits than consequences if you set other people up to fail. Just wait for your neighbor to screw up.
Additionally, look at how much we are spending. We are spending money we simply do not have! I don't understand how that teaches the American people anything. Basically, if you don't have the money, borrow it and then more and more, it will be okay. I am sorry, isn't that why we are in this predicament in the first place. People were living beyond their means, now our government is living beyond its means. Even if we taxed every person making more than 100,000 dollars a year at 50%, I don't think we would be able to pay back the debt we are incurring, particularly when we are taking that tax and giving it away for free to people who barely contribute to the tax fund anyway. We are not a socialist country and I don't want to be. I wish I could decide who to help and who not to help. I am a bleeding hard liberal most of the time... but damn it, this is just stupid. Maybe it is time that I turn into a republican, because even though they may screw the little person, they make people work for their benefits at least.
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Rule of Conscious for doctors
Fine, I can see the argument for there to be a rule of conscious. There may be circumstances where people disagree with another's choices. But I do think that a doctor then has an obligation to refer a patient to another doctor to discuss the issue. They are potentially doing harm to the patient who is coming for help. Doing no harm does not just mean in accordance to your morals. A woman asking for the morning after pill, you may disagree with, but what kind of harm are you potentially putting a person in. A doctor does not know all of a person's personal circumstances, and the amount of time it would take to gather all that information makes taking the morning after pill too late. What if it is an incestuous situation a person has no control over? Making a person have to deal with even more emotional trauma from a forced pregnancy is doing harm to a person. So fine, if you want to deny care based on choice of conscious, that is okay, but I think I have the right to know about it in advance.
I think that doctors and health insurance plans should be responsible for disclosing that information in documentation availble to people prior to going into a doctor's office.
If a medical personal is going to refuse to provide birth control because of moral objections in any case, he or she should need to put that as a by line, the same way "bilingual" is listed.
Something like "rule of conscious for all matters of conception" that way women can make informed choices about being a doctor's patient or not. I would hate to find out I am going to see a doctor who is refusing treatments to others because their morals are judging my behavior and lifestyle.
Just as people who perform abortions are discrimnated against, then individuals could make conscious decisions to not support the oppostite practice either.
It would create a competative market where patients can more actively choose their doctor.
That way I can chose a doctor who is not refusing help or treatment to a person requiesting it because they are trying to improve their lifestyle and make equally informed decisions along their moral guidelines.
What happened to the our freedoms. These doctors refusal to refer to another doctor who is willing to help or address a patients issue in alignment with his or her morality is imposing their lifestyle on another. Fine, dont' do my abortion, but don't withold information about where I can get help from people who are more understanding and in line with my morals, then you are doing harm to me!
I think that doctors and health insurance plans should be responsible for disclosing that information in documentation availble to people prior to going into a doctor's office.
If a medical personal is going to refuse to provide birth control because of moral objections in any case, he or she should need to put that as a by line, the same way "bilingual" is listed.
Something like "rule of conscious for all matters of conception" that way women can make informed choices about being a doctor's patient or not. I would hate to find out I am going to see a doctor who is refusing treatments to others because their morals are judging my behavior and lifestyle.
Just as people who perform abortions are discrimnated against, then individuals could make conscious decisions to not support the oppostite practice either.
It would create a competative market where patients can more actively choose their doctor.
That way I can chose a doctor who is not refusing help or treatment to a person requiesting it because they are trying to improve their lifestyle and make equally informed decisions along their moral guidelines.
What happened to the our freedoms. These doctors refusal to refer to another doctor who is willing to help or address a patients issue in alignment with his or her morality is imposing their lifestyle on another. Fine, dont' do my abortion, but don't withold information about where I can get help from people who are more understanding and in line with my morals, then you are doing harm to me!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)