Jeremy
Yeah fo shiz. Although there was some talk of going to Rockhampton next year. I don't think Hagen knows of this idea yet though. I definitely plan on going to Cape York sometime in the nearish future, so a footbag stop on the way up or something similar would be nice. Long time to plan anyway 
This post is mainly about bush fires
Luckily nobody I know have lost lives or property due to fire. Jamieson Hickingbotham was quite near the fires - they got to about 5km of his house apparently, and another friend of mine really was lucky - half the houses on his street were destroyed but not his, largely thanks to it being "water bombed" by a helicopter named "Elvis" just as the fire hit.
Of course it's not really that lucky - In fact the chances of somebody I know losing their house are exceptionally small.
It's interesting to think about those odds, because this event really is a typical case of a "black swan" which has been made significantly worse by poor risk management. A "black swan" could be called, in the words of Donald Rumsfeld, an "unknown unknown." You could also think of it as an extreme outlier. If you do a standard distribution graph (the bell curve) this is an event right on the fringe of what is possible. However if you change your graph to take into account the quantitative significance of the event, it is far more significant than any of the other events. Of course using a standard distribution graph is also a mistake, as you don't know what the actual range of possibilities are, or indeed the probability of extreme events like the one we've just seen occurring - especially if the environment is changing.
There have been some ridiculous responses to the fires. Probably the dumbest one is from a few indigenous Australians who have claimed that we should be regularly burning off like they used to. It shows just how bad our treatment of indigenous Australians is that they don't even know their own history. The areas that have been hit by this fire have never been faced regular fires. It's easy to see this from both the geological record and the forest ecology. Indeed places that face regular burnings are not forests - because eucalyptus seedlings cannot survive regular fire and fully grown eucalyptus encourage very hot fires so as to wipe out competition (because naturally fires don't occur regularly - so the seedlings have decades to grow into mature trees before the next fire). Regular burning off would turn the forests into grasslands or deserts - as can be seen in the areas where indigenous people do regularly burn off (indeed it was the purpose of regular burnings - to change the ecology to grass land so that animals were more common and easier to hunt). I also find calling this policy "living with the land instead of on the land" rather ignorant. Living with the land would not mean permanently changing it's ecology.
The reality is that due to climate change the forests in these areas no longer have the best conditions to grow there, and over time we're going to see many more of these fires, eventually leading to the loss of these forests and their replacement with more suitable dry and open, probably savannah or desert like ecology. It's too late to be burning off - we should have tackled CO2 emissions in in the 1960s when scientists first showed that it was a real and serious problem (or even in the 1890s when the first evidence appeared and when it became obvious that temperatures were increasing). Burning off or not burning off will eventually have the same outcome - the loss of dry eucalyptus sclerophyll forests across Australia.
This post is mainly about bush fires
Luckily nobody I know have lost lives or property due to fire. Jamieson Hickingbotham was quite near the fires - they got to about 5km of his house apparently, and another friend of mine really was lucky - half the houses on his street were destroyed but not his, largely thanks to it being "water bombed" by a helicopter named "Elvis" just as the fire hit.
Of course it's not really that lucky - In fact the chances of somebody I know losing their house are exceptionally small.
It's interesting to think about those odds, because this event really is a typical case of a "black swan" which has been made significantly worse by poor risk management. A "black swan" could be called, in the words of Donald Rumsfeld, an "unknown unknown." You could also think of it as an extreme outlier. If you do a standard distribution graph (the bell curve) this is an event right on the fringe of what is possible. However if you change your graph to take into account the quantitative significance of the event, it is far more significant than any of the other events. Of course using a standard distribution graph is also a mistake, as you don't know what the actual range of possibilities are, or indeed the probability of extreme events like the one we've just seen occurring - especially if the environment is changing.
There have been some ridiculous responses to the fires. Probably the dumbest one is from a few indigenous Australians who have claimed that we should be regularly burning off like they used to. It shows just how bad our treatment of indigenous Australians is that they don't even know their own history. The areas that have been hit by this fire have never been faced regular fires. It's easy to see this from both the geological record and the forest ecology. Indeed places that face regular burnings are not forests - because eucalyptus seedlings cannot survive regular fire and fully grown eucalyptus encourage very hot fires so as to wipe out competition (because naturally fires don't occur regularly - so the seedlings have decades to grow into mature trees before the next fire). Regular burning off would turn the forests into grasslands or deserts - as can be seen in the areas where indigenous people do regularly burn off (indeed it was the purpose of regular burnings - to change the ecology to grass land so that animals were more common and easier to hunt). I also find calling this policy "living with the land instead of on the land" rather ignorant. Living with the land would not mean permanently changing it's ecology.
The reality is that due to climate change the forests in these areas no longer have the best conditions to grow there, and over time we're going to see many more of these fires, eventually leading to the loss of these forests and their replacement with more suitable dry and open, probably savannah or desert like ecology. It's too late to be burning off - we should have tackled CO2 emissions in in the 1960s when scientists first showed that it was a real and serious problem (or even in the 1890s when the first evidence appeared and when it became obvious that temperatures were increasing). Burning off or not burning off will eventually have the same outcome - the loss of dry eucalyptus sclerophyll forests across Australia.
True, although there is not a great deal of evidence that the bush fires in Victoria were caused by arson. So far that's a little speculative, but obviously evokes a lot of emotion, so has lead to a lot of media attention, when really the policy are just trying to find out what the cause of the fire was and if it were arson or not - as they do with all fires. It's also important to point out that when you have exceptional dry conditions after 12 years of drought, very strong winds (50km per hour plus) and temperatures over 48 degrees C (118 F) with high fuel loads then fire is inevitable, and almost certainly some of the fires were not caused by arson.
Well here is the perspective of the fire fighters on the issue;
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009 ... 489847.htm
Fire can be caused by many things - discarded bottles or reflective materials, lightning strikes, metal hitting stones, in 48 degree temps (in the shade) some flammable liquids can ignite if they're left in the sun. In fact metal in contact with dry grass could potentially get hot enough to ignite. There are also plenty of potential accidental human causes - such as discarded cigarettes etc. that are obviously not arson.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009 ... 489847.htm
Fire can be caused by many things - discarded bottles or reflective materials, lightning strikes, metal hitting stones, in 48 degree temps (in the shade) some flammable liquids can ignite if they're left in the sun. In fact metal in contact with dry grass could potentially get hot enough to ignite. There are also plenty of potential accidental human causes - such as discarded cigarettes etc. that are obviously not arson.
Here is an interesting statistic to make people hate me;
In response to the current bush fires, the total amount of public financial donations is around $14,000 per person made homeless from the tragedy. Plus there's all the government assistance, insurance money etc.
In contrast the total amount of global foreign assistance, including government assistance and public donations for the boxing day tsunami was approximately $4000 per person made homeless.
If we look at Australia in real terms we have $100,000,000 donated (so far) for a fire that killed 300 people and $77,000,000 donated (in total) for an event that killed over 220,000 people.
Of course we are a society that cares about itself and its own needs far more than anybody else, so we shouldn't be surprised.
In response to the current bush fires, the total amount of public financial donations is around $14,000 per person made homeless from the tragedy. Plus there's all the government assistance, insurance money etc.
In contrast the total amount of global foreign assistance, including government assistance and public donations for the boxing day tsunami was approximately $4000 per person made homeless.
If we look at Australia in real terms we have $100,000,000 donated (so far) for a fire that killed 300 people and $77,000,000 donated (in total) for an event that killed over 220,000 people.
Of course we are a society that cares about itself and its own needs far more than anybody else, so we shouldn't be surprised.
Shredzilla wrote:But the reason our economy has reached a tanking point is a direct result of greed, and mis-use of money.
Jeremy wrote:Sure, but when you say "our economy" you're really talking about the American economy. Some countries have much stronger regulations on debt and even in America it wasn't until a change in debt policy in 2001 that lead to the current economic crisis. If you're using the current economic crisis as evidence of greed and mis-use of money in the system, why didn't that create as serious a crisis pre 2001? The other serious issue responsible for the crisis is not greed and money mis-use but the so called "ludic fallacy" - economists applied simplified models and "laboratory" statistics and looked at the odds but not the consequences in risk management, leading them to not take into account the real world and not look at the possibility of things occurring by chance that their models didn't account for. These people were clearly not evil, but well intentioned and even won Nobel prizes. They just had too much faith in ideas that turned out to be wrong. That's not evil and it's not greed, it's just human error.
Shredzilla wrote:The practices of the corporations who stretched the economists' vision are 'evil'. Again, I can't come up with a better term for evil. "Someone/thing who intentionally does wrong to others for their own betterment". Something along those lines.
Jeremy wrote:I reject the notion that the people who caused the economic crisis were intentionally acting for their own betterment at the expense of others.
Shredzilla wrote:Haha wow you have a pretty naive outlook on post-modern American economics. Yeah, all corporate capitalists are saints I don't have the time or patience to explain it in explicit detail. I was merely making a statement on the evils of Capitalism in American society, especially related to big corporations. The government is also tied in with it, there was practically no regulation on economic policy for many years, and the regulations that were there could be paid off by corporate lobbyists. If you don't believe it, there's nothing more I can say to convince you. Do some reading on the subject.
Paraphrasing;
Chris; The economic crisis was caused by greed and the misuse of money.
Jeremy; The problem was a lack of regulation and poor risk management.
Chris; No, it was people who exploited others.
Jeremy; I reject that.
Chris; You're naive and don't know what you're talking about then. The problem was a lack of regulation.
Jeremy; You don't know what either of us are talking about.
Chris; I do, I'm just not going to tell you what I know.
Jeremy; You're an idiot.
Ok so so much has been happening lately. I really should give a more detailed blog post.
Good news, I actually get on well with my housemates girlfriend, who described me as "evil" when she found out he lived with me, despite never having met me. That is good news. We still haven't discussed a couple of probably significant subjects though
Had great times with Ollie Adams and then Andrew Grant when they were here. Some epic adventures and stuff. I should probably comment more later.
Mainly I just wanted to say that if you get the opportunity, and I'm not sure if you will, go see the Australian movie "The Combination." Really good stuff. I think the message may be lost on a lot of people, but when you see it, think about this; the best thing about this movie is the way it captures what it's like to grow up in a country but be identified as an outsider, even though you have no experience of that outside life that people are judging you on. What can you do? In my case, you're "not" Australian but you're certainly not Japanese either. When people attack my Japanese heritage the only response I can give is the fact that my ancestors on my "Australian" side died in both world wars fighting for Australia. That doesn't actually address their attack at all, but it's the only response that has any impact.
Good news, I actually get on well with my housemates girlfriend, who described me as "evil" when she found out he lived with me, despite never having met me. That is good news. We still haven't discussed a couple of probably significant subjects though
Had great times with Ollie Adams and then Andrew Grant when they were here. Some epic adventures and stuff. I should probably comment more later.
Mainly I just wanted to say that if you get the opportunity, and I'm not sure if you will, go see the Australian movie "The Combination." Really good stuff. I think the message may be lost on a lot of people, but when you see it, think about this; the best thing about this movie is the way it captures what it's like to grow up in a country but be identified as an outsider, even though you have no experience of that outside life that people are judging you on. What can you do? In my case, you're "not" Australian but you're certainly not Japanese either. When people attack my Japanese heritage the only response I can give is the fact that my ancestors on my "Australian" side died in both world wars fighting for Australia. That doesn't actually address their attack at all, but it's the only response that has any impact.
Ok so it could be said that I take modified a little less seriously than some people, and as such, find it rather amusing to get into arguments with people over issues that are probably not really very serious, although I certainly never say stuff I don't agree with.
However what could be more fun than inadvertently (and completely unintentionally) attracting the attention of somebody on facebook who belongs to what is considered in all Western countries around the world, as well as many others, a terrorist organisation - an organisation that was the first to use women as suicide bombers and is especially famous for using pregnant teenagers. Imagine making a meaningless and facetious comment about somebody's facebook status, and then receiving messages from somebody who either belongs or strongly supports this terrorist organisation (The Syrani Social Nationalist Party).
It's like Christmas. Even if he stops responding to me, I'm still going to keep sending him messages letting him know how I feel about the SSNP. Given I can't blow him up or cut off his hands (or would, even if I could), a stream of spam is as best as I can do. I look forward to having a Jihad declared against me
However what could be more fun than inadvertently (and completely unintentionally) attracting the attention of somebody on facebook who belongs to what is considered in all Western countries around the world, as well as many others, a terrorist organisation - an organisation that was the first to use women as suicide bombers and is especially famous for using pregnant teenagers. Imagine making a meaningless and facetious comment about somebody's facebook status, and then receiving messages from somebody who either belongs or strongly supports this terrorist organisation (The Syrani Social Nationalist Party).
It's like Christmas. Even if he stops responding to me, I'm still going to keep sending him messages letting him know how I feel about the SSNP. Given I can't blow him up or cut off his hands (or would, even if I could), a stream of spam is as best as I can do. I look forward to having a Jihad declared against me
So as footbaggers I'm sure you practice the odd test of skill that seems rather pointless. Something I do a lot playing footy and touch footy is catching the ball behind my back. Especially at training or waiting for games I'll throw the ball as high as I can and then catch it behind me. It's not that hard, but obviously takes a lot of practice to get consistent at.
Yesterday that practice paid off. We were in our first semi final in mixed and somebody gave me a bad pass which I fumbled, and then the ball went behind me. Still fumbling it behind my back I stepped two players, including their best guy and didn't manage to gain control of the ball or bring it around my front until as I crossed the scoring line. Even the opposition gave me props.
We won 8 vs 3, which was a good effort, although fairly one sided, given that I scored 4 and assisted 4. Next week will be much tougher opposition in the preliminary final, which I'm worried about, and then a grand final against a team that just smashed the team we play in the prelim. Still for a team with only 1 person who has ever played before I think we've improved awesomely, and have a genuine chance.
In mens we play tonight for a run straight into the grand final, although we're playing a team that is very strong. Still it would be really great to beat them, because otherwise next week I'll probably have 4 games in 4 days, with the last one being the highest level and game (but not actually the most important I guess, because if we win the mixed grand final that will be one of the best wins of my sporting career - given that it's a team of close friends who have never played touch before and we've trained twice a week for the season and improved sooooo much. Actually I'll probably cry if we win mixed ).
Oh yeah, I scored a 70m intercept try last night as well. The field is 70m, so basically I cut off a pass from the opposition trying to score and ran the whole field. It was a shit pass though, so not much credit to me.
Yesterday that practice paid off. We were in our first semi final in mixed and somebody gave me a bad pass which I fumbled, and then the ball went behind me. Still fumbling it behind my back I stepped two players, including their best guy and didn't manage to gain control of the ball or bring it around my front until as I crossed the scoring line. Even the opposition gave me props.
We won 8 vs 3, which was a good effort, although fairly one sided, given that I scored 4 and assisted 4. Next week will be much tougher opposition in the preliminary final, which I'm worried about, and then a grand final against a team that just smashed the team we play in the prelim. Still for a team with only 1 person who has ever played before I think we've improved awesomely, and have a genuine chance.
In mens we play tonight for a run straight into the grand final, although we're playing a team that is very strong. Still it would be really great to beat them, because otherwise next week I'll probably have 4 games in 4 days, with the last one being the highest level and game (but not actually the most important I guess, because if we win the mixed grand final that will be one of the best wins of my sporting career - given that it's a team of close friends who have never played touch before and we've trained twice a week for the season and improved sooooo much. Actually I'll probably cry if we win mixed
).Oh yeah, I scored a 70m intercept try last night as well. The field is 70m, so basically I cut off a pass from the opposition trying to score and ran the whole field. It was a shit pass though, so not much credit to me.
Had a good footbag kick with Lotus on Saturday despite having a terrible hangover that lasted all day. It was raining truckloads so we wandered around Salamanca for a while until Lotus found a cafe that was closing that said it was ok for us to move some tables and play there. It was very hot and humid, but we both played well so that was good. I don't think I hit anything worth mentioning. I did buy some second hand books though, mainly on account of when I enter any kind of bookshop I am compelled to buy something. However it turns out that I already owned one of the books (The Cancer Ward by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn), another that I started reading (I need a break from my 1200 page book about the Middle East) is terrible. It's a collection of essays by P.J. O'Rourke - whose name I could remember when I bought the book, but I can't remember why. Now I know who he is, and what a waste of time reading this will be. I'll finish it anyway. I don't recall what the third book was.
Yesterday was epic times. I went on a fishing trip with my housemate, his dad, uncle and friend of theirs. Good times. I only caught one fish, but you'll have to wait for the photo for details
. My housemate's dad works near the top of parks and wildlife, and his uncle is a biologist and environmental manager (and world expert on birds of prey), so it's great to spend time with them and pick their brains 
. Also to hear humorous anecdotes about famous people they know like Dick Smith and David Attenborough.
That's about it. Getting ready for epic touch football this weekend (Thurs, Fri, Sat), and then hopefully I'm going to give up my social life and skool footbag until Aussie Nationals.
Yesterday was epic times. I went on a fishing trip with my housemate, his dad, uncle and friend of theirs. Good times. I only caught one fish, but you'll have to wait for the photo for details
. My housemate's dad works near the top of parks and wildlife, and his uncle is a biologist and environmental manager (and world expert on birds of prey), so it's great to spend time with them and pick their brains . Also to hear humorous anecdotes about famous people they know like Dick Smith and David Attenborough. That's about it. Getting ready for epic touch football this weekend (Thurs, Fri, Sat), and then hopefully I'm going to give up my social life and skool footbag until Aussie Nationals.
-
King Monkey
- Post Master General
- Posts: 2745
- Joined: 18 May 2003 04:39
- Location: Sydney, Australia
Shit!! Way to shame our measly catches in Narooma! 
I guess you were due after your sub-standard performance previously
Crazy
I guess you were due after your sub-standard performance previously
Crazy
Ian Pritchard - http://www.ausfootbag.org
'People, just play Footbag and stop being dickheads!' - Michał Biarda
'People, just play Footbag and stop being dickheads!' - Michał Biarda
Yeah my fish must weigh more than all the fish caught at Oom I reckon the next biggest fish I've caught after this one probably weighed about 1kg at the most. It took about half an hour to land once it was on the line. While we were reeling it in I asked my housemate how big he thought it was and he held his hands out about 25cm apart. I guess because of the struggle and whatever I just believed him without question, which was silly since it was basically stronger than I am, so I was pretty shocked when we pulled it out and it was about 5 times bigger than that.
It's good though, we've been eating fresh tuna basically every day
I reckon the next biggest fish I've caught after this one probably weighed about 1kg at the most. It took about half an hour to land once it was on the line. While we were reeling it in I asked my housemate how big he thought it was and he held his hands out about 25cm apart. I guess because of the struggle and whatever I just believed him without question, which was silly since it was basically stronger than I am, so I was pretty shocked when we pulled it out and it was about 5 times bigger than that. It's good though, we've been eating fresh tuna basically every day
I don't usually post this kind of thing, but these are hilarious. I don't know if they're true or not. Backstory; I got them from a website that is on the list of blacklisted websites in Australia. The list was leaked on wikileaks today so I'm sure everybody in IT have been trawling it and looking for interesting things. It's supposed to essentially just be websites that depict or promote illegal behaviour but reality shows that's less than 50% of the websites (although the majority are pornography sites). In fact probably over 80% are just broken links.
Anyway apparently you face $11,000 a day fine for displaying any of the links so I'll avoid that (although they include pages from google, wikipedia, youtube and a dentist's website). The list is also meant to be completely secret and you never get told if your website is on it, so you have no ability to appeal etc.
Anyway enough blabbering;
------------------
The following quotations are from a book called Disorder in the American Courts by Charles M. Sevilla and are things people actually said in court, word for word, taken down and published by court reporters that had the torment of staying calm while these exchanges were taking place. Regardless of originations, they can be eye openers as to the mentality of those engaged in the drill...
ATTORNEY: What was the first thing your husband said to you that morning?
WITNESS: He said, 'Where am I, Cathy?'
ATTORNEY: And why did that upset you?
WITNESS: My name is Susan!
____________________________________________
ATTORNEY: What gear were you in at the moment of the impact?
WITNESS: Gucci sweats and Reeboks.
____________________________________________
ATTORNEY: Are you sexually active?
WITNESS: No, I just lie there..
____________________________________________
ATTORNEY: This myasthenia gravis, does it affect your memory at all?
WITNESS: Yes.
ATTORNEY: And in what ways does it affect your memory?
WITNESS: I forget.
ATTORNEY: You forget? Can you give us an example of something you forgot?
___________________________________________
ATTORNEY: Do you know if your daughter has ever been involved in voodoo?
WITNESS: We both do.
ATTORNEY: Voodoo?
WITNESS: We do.
ATTORNEY: You do?
WITNESS: Yes, voodoo.
____________________________________________
ATTORNEY: Now doctor, isn't it true that when a person dies in his sleep, he doesn't know about it until the next morning?
WITNESS: Did you actually pass the bar exam?
____________________________________
ATTORNEY: The youngest son, the twenty-year-old, how old is he?
WITNESS: He's twenty, much like your IQ.
___________________________________________
ATTORNEY: Were you present when your picture was taken?
WITNESS: Are you shitting me?
_________________________________________
ATTORNEY: So the date of conception (of the baby) was August 8th?
WITNESS: Yes.
=2 0 ATTORNEY: And what were you doing at that time?
WITNESS: getting laid
____________________________________________
ATTORNEY: She had three children, right?
WITNESS: Yes.
ATTORNEY: How many were boys?
WITNESS: None.
ATTORNEY: Were there any girls?
W ITNESS : Your Honor, I think I need a different attorney. Can I get a new attorney?
____________________________________________
ATTORNEY: How was your first marriage terminated?
WITNESS: By death.
ATTORNEY: And by whose death was it terminated?
WITNESS: Take a guess.
____________________________________________
ATTORNEY: Can you describe the individual?
WITNESS: He was about medium height and had a beard.
ATTORNEY: Was this a male or a female?
WITNESS: Unless the C ircus was in town I'm going with male.
_____________________________________
ATTORNEY: Is your appearance here this morning pursuant to a deposition notice which I sent to your attorney?
WITNESS: No, this is how I dress when I go to work.
______________________________________
ATTORNEY: Doctor, how many of your autopsies have you performed on dead people?
WITNESS: All of them. The live ones put up too much of a fight.
_________________________________________
ATTORNEY: ALL your responses MUST be oral, OK? What school did you go to?
WITNESS: Oral.
_________________________________________
ATTORNEY: Do you recall the time that you examined the body?
WITNESS: The autopsy started around 8:30 p.m.
ATTORNEY: And Mr. Denton was dead at the time?
WITNESS: If not, he was by the time I fini shed.
____________________________________________
ATTORNEY: Are you qualified to give a urine sample?
WITNESS: Are you qualified to ask that question?
______________________________________
And the best for last:
ATTORNEY: Doctor, before you performed the autopsy, did you check for a pulse?
WITNESS: No.
ATTORNEY: Did you check for blood pressure?
WITNESS: No.
ATTORNEY: Did you check for breathing?
WITNESS: No.
ATTORNEY: So, then it is possible that the patient was alive when you began the autopsy?
WITNESS: No.
ATTORNEY: How can you be so sure, Doctor?
WITNESS: Because his brain was sitting on my desk in a jar.
ATTORNEY: I see, but could the patient have still been alive, nevertheless?
WITNESS: Yes, it is possible that he could have been alive and practicing law.
Anyway apparently you face $11,000 a day fine for displaying any of the links so I'll avoid that (although they include pages from google, wikipedia, youtube and a dentist's website). The list is also meant to be completely secret and you never get told if your website is on it, so you have no ability to appeal etc.
Anyway enough blabbering;
------------------
The following quotations are from a book called Disorder in the American Courts by Charles M. Sevilla and are things people actually said in court, word for word, taken down and published by court reporters that had the torment of staying calm while these exchanges were taking place. Regardless of originations, they can be eye openers as to the mentality of those engaged in the drill...
ATTORNEY: What was the first thing your husband said to you that morning?
WITNESS: He said, 'Where am I, Cathy?'
ATTORNEY: And why did that upset you?
WITNESS: My name is Susan!
____________________________________________
ATTORNEY: What gear were you in at the moment of the impact?
WITNESS: Gucci sweats and Reeboks.
____________________________________________
ATTORNEY: Are you sexually active?
WITNESS: No, I just lie there..
____________________________________________
ATTORNEY: This myasthenia gravis, does it affect your memory at all?
WITNESS: Yes.
ATTORNEY: And in what ways does it affect your memory?
WITNESS: I forget.
ATTORNEY: You forget? Can you give us an example of something you forgot?
___________________________________________
ATTORNEY: Do you know if your daughter has ever been involved in voodoo?
WITNESS: We both do.
ATTORNEY: Voodoo?
WITNESS: We do.
ATTORNEY: You do?
WITNESS: Yes, voodoo.
____________________________________________
ATTORNEY: Now doctor, isn't it true that when a person dies in his sleep, he doesn't know about it until the next morning?
WITNESS: Did you actually pass the bar exam?
____________________________________
ATTORNEY: The youngest son, the twenty-year-old, how old is he?
WITNESS: He's twenty, much like your IQ.
___________________________________________
ATTORNEY: Were you present when your picture was taken?
WITNESS: Are you shitting me?
_________________________________________
ATTORNEY: So the date of conception (of the baby) was August 8th?
WITNESS: Yes.
=2 0 ATTORNEY: And what were you doing at that time?
WITNESS: getting laid
____________________________________________
ATTORNEY: She had three children, right?
WITNESS: Yes.
ATTORNEY: How many were boys?
WITNESS: None.
ATTORNEY: Were there any girls?
W ITNESS : Your Honor, I think I need a different attorney. Can I get a new attorney?
____________________________________________
ATTORNEY: How was your first marriage terminated?
WITNESS: By death.
ATTORNEY: And by whose death was it terminated?
WITNESS: Take a guess.
____________________________________________
ATTORNEY: Can you describe the individual?
WITNESS: He was about medium height and had a beard.
ATTORNEY: Was this a male or a female?
WITNESS: Unless the C ircus was in town I'm going with male.
_____________________________________
ATTORNEY: Is your appearance here this morning pursuant to a deposition notice which I sent to your attorney?
WITNESS: No, this is how I dress when I go to work.
______________________________________
ATTORNEY: Doctor, how many of your autopsies have you performed on dead people?
WITNESS: All of them. The live ones put up too much of a fight.
_________________________________________
ATTORNEY: ALL your responses MUST be oral, OK? What school did you go to?
WITNESS: Oral.
_________________________________________
ATTORNEY: Do you recall the time that you examined the body?
WITNESS: The autopsy started around 8:30 p.m.
ATTORNEY: And Mr. Denton was dead at the time?
WITNESS: If not, he was by the time I fini shed.
____________________________________________
ATTORNEY: Are you qualified to give a urine sample?
WITNESS: Are you qualified to ask that question?
______________________________________
And the best for last:
ATTORNEY: Doctor, before you performed the autopsy, did you check for a pulse?
WITNESS: No.
ATTORNEY: Did you check for blood pressure?
WITNESS: No.
ATTORNEY: Did you check for breathing?
WITNESS: No.
ATTORNEY: So, then it is possible that the patient was alive when you began the autopsy?
WITNESS: No.
ATTORNEY: How can you be so sure, Doctor?
WITNESS: Because his brain was sitting on my desk in a jar.
ATTORNEY: I see, but could the patient have still been alive, nevertheless?
WITNESS: Yes, it is possible that he could have been alive and practicing law.
