1) Who the fuck can explain this? For people too lazy to click on things, the word "this" in the last sentence links to an article on CNN about a Goddamn Invisibility Clock.
Cloak.
2) Why is this article written for the childrens? Headline: "Scientists may be able to make magic like Harry Potter." Opening sentence: "WASHINGTON (AP) -- Imagine an invisibility cloak that works just like the one Harry Potter inherited from his father. Researchers in England and the United States think they know how to do that." This is two paragraphs.
Let's take a look at this here real quick. Starts off "imagine:" a bit kiddy. "Just like." Reference is made to events occuring within the diegesis of a fictive work written for children. "Think they know how to do that" constitutes seven one-syllable words in a row. This is on CNN? Not CNN for kids or anything, mind you, if that even exists.
The circumstances behind this are obvious. Malchow has, of late, attained a kind of critical mass of toolery which exists in violation of certain universal physical laws. In order to maintain equilibrium, the cosmos has been forced to bring rise to a sort of anti-Malchow, one who makes an ass of himself in public not by means of excessive verbosity but by its opposite. The "reporter" in question goes unnamed because the article was not written by a human, as is assumed, but rather by some bodiless construct or abstraction. No one at the AP or CNN has ever seen this article. It is invisible.
No comments:
Post a Comment