Alexander Pope can suck it!

Ready for some thrilling news from the world of forensic theatre analysis? Then buckle your doublets and hold on to your neck ruffles: Shakespeare's got a new play.

Above: The Jacobean age was objectively ridiculous.

He might as well have called it:
Time to Remodel the Kitchen of Dune

You're probably wondering how a dead English playwright whose work's been studied and scrutinized constantly for the last 400 years could possibly write a new play. Well, he didn't and it's not. New that is. Back in 1728, a playwright named Lewis Theobald cranked out a play called Double Falsehood, which he said was an adaptation of a lost play called Cardenio written by Shakespeare and John Fletcher. It's sort of like how Frank Herbert's son somehow keeps finding new, unpublished Dune novels in his father's basement. And like Brian Herbert's many Random Noun of Dune books, Lewis Theobald's work was met with skepticism. When pressed for proof, he claimed that he'd pieced the play together from some original manuscripts he'd found, but they'd been destroyed in a library fire so...you know, just take his word for it.

Despite the fact that this was 1728 and their entire waddle and daub civilization was flammable, the idea that Theobald's manuscripts had been lost in a fire was viewed by some of his contemporaries as a little too convenient so they called shenanigans.

Pictured: A typical Wednesday in Theobald's London. 

Are we sure Pope wasn't on to something?
I mean, c'mon Hamlet, fardels? Seriously?

Theobald's most notable shenanigan-caller was his former friend, poet Alexander Pope, with whom he had a falling out over Pope's attempts to 'improve' Shakespeare's plays by re-writing the parts he didn't like or didn't understand. In response, Theobald wrote the preposterously titled pamphlet: Shakespeare Restored, or a Specimen of the many Errors as well Committed as Unamended by Mr Pope in his late edition of this poet; designed not only to correct the said Edition, but to restore the true Reading of Shakespeare in all the Editions ever published. Yup, that whole thing's the title.

Guess what it was about? Anyway, pamphlets were how you had flame wars in the 18th century and it was on. For three hundred years, the authorship of Double Falsehood was in doubt, and by doubt I mean most scholars assumed Theobald was full of shit because some poet who wrote the first Cliff's Notes couldn't take a little criticism.

"Screw that fancy douche bag..."

-Alexander Pope,

wordsmith

Above: Pope's grave. If you're ever in
London, be sure to point and laugh at it. 

This all changed last year when researchers Ryan L. Boyd and James W. Pennebaker from the University of Texas ran the play through some text analyzing software and discovered that holy shit, maybe Theobald wasn't making it up after all. Their program compared the play to Shakespeare's, Fletcher's and Theobald's other work and found linguistic and psychological similarities that suggest that Shakespeare probably wrote most of it with only some text from Fletcher and just a smidgen of Theobald thrown in.

"Really, there's just very, very little similarity to Theobald that it is practically impossible that he wrote it."

-Ryan L. Boyd, inviting Alexander Pope to suck it

So congratulations Lewis Theobald. I think. I mean, before Boyd and Pennebaker's analysis, everyone kind of thought you were a liar who wrote an incredibly convincing Shakespeare play. Now everyone knows you were telling the truth and we can chalk yet another one up for Shakespeare. It's about time he got some recognition, right? Good for him.

"What, another one? What's that make, thirty-eight masterpieces?
 Thirty-nine? Oh, just put it over there with the others..."

In many ways, this is our own fault.

Here's the thing, I'm going to complain about re-re-re-re-release of the Star Wars films. Yes, again. You can bail out now if you want, but understand that it's out of my hands this time. No, really. You see, they-that is, Disney-are making me do this. How, you ask? And yes, I interpreted that exasperated eye-roll you just made as you telling me that you'd like me to elaborate. Don't think I can't see you.

You might want to think about sticking a post-it over it or something... 

I'm confused, these people seem to be
outdoors and yet are having a good time...

Anyway, here's a little background for those of you living rich, full lives with outdoor activity and interpersonal relationships. Star Wars creator George Lucas, apparently fed up with constantly being drenched in the hate-spit of outraged fans every time he leaves the house, sold Star Wars to Disney back in 2012. Three years later, things have been mostly looking up. Despite its aggressively dull title, Star Wars: The Force Awakens looks pretty good, the all-Yoda spin off movie they threatened us with is nowhere to be seen.

Yup, the future was bright for Star Wars fans and it was only a matter of time before Disney gave us the one thing we've been asking for years: the original theatrical editions of the first three films. No more Aussie Boba Fett. No more CGI. Just Han murdering Greedo and Ewoks playing Yub Nub on a xylophone made of out Storm Trooper skulls.

Above: As God intended.

"Goddamnit."

-The Internet

So today's digital release of the Special Edition versions of Episodes IV-VI leaves me with one, I think very reasonable question: What the fuck, Disney? I don't think I'm alone when I say that every change made to the originals was a terrible, ill-advised mistake. Go look at the reviews on iTunes. It's as if millions of nerds suddenly cried out in terror and then immediately registered their disappointment online. Have you ever heard someone say they like the Special Editions? No, you haven't. Nobody likes them. Fact.

Why then, would Disney only re-release the universally despised Special Edition instead of giving us the option to choose the objectively superior original versions? Do they just hate the fans? A little, but mostly they just really love money. Apparently there is an un-touched version they're holding back so they can release it down the road and get us to once again buy these movies we've already seen a million times. And we're going to fall for it, just like we did the last three times they pulled this. Holy shit, what is wrong with us?

Lots. There's lots wrong with us. Here. Take it. Just give us the good Star Wars movies...

Space: The Dank Frontier

Finally, scientist with a prediction
that isn't about how we're all doomed.

Hey everybody, good news: aliens. And soon! Well, twenty years, but for science that's pretty soon. And this isn't coming from some nutter in a tinfoil hat with a gif-filled website about reploids. This is from NASA's chief scientist. Yes, the actual NASA. She has like doctorates and everything and she said today at a public panel in Washington:

"I believe we are going to have strong indications of life beyond Earth in the next decade and definitive evidence in the next 10 to 20 years."

-Ellen Stofan, chief scientist

for NASA, yeah, that NASA

Awesome, now let's enjoy that for a minute before somebody issues a retraction...There. Wasn't that fun? Now comes the bland, science-y reality. This life beyond Earth she's talking about isn't going to beam down and ask us to explain this hew-mon emotion we call 'love.' It's just going to sit their and probably smell a little musty. But I'll let Dr. Stofan explain.

"I'm sorry, I don't understand. Why don't you simply eat your mates 
after fertilization? It seems like it would save a lot of time and effort."

Could...could the microbes be green?

"We are not talking about little green men. We are talking about little microbes."

-Ellen Stofan, NASA's chief

crusher of dreams

Yes. Microbes. Like in your sponge. In her defense she did say 'strong indications of life' and not 'alien starship orbiting our planet and transmitting the prime numbers.' But still, it's kind of a letdown after a headline like: Top NASA Scientist: We'll find Signs of Alien Life 'Within a Decade.'

Ok NASA, so maybe our fancy telescopes will someday pick up gasses in the atmosphere of some planet that could be produced by microbes and that will be great. Like, in theory. But if you want to inspire people to take an interest in space exploration again, you're going to need to do better than gassy space funk.

To seek out strange new worlds and disinfect them, I guess...

Wait, there's a Vice President of Meat Science?

Goddamnit, eating meat is one of the
 few things we're actually good at...

Great, like vegans needed another reason to be smug. Here, check this out. What, not enough strength in your protein-starved hands to even click on it? What? Don't look at me like that, I'm just kidding, it turns out you're probably on to something. Let me summarize: The Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee, a panel that advises the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Department of Health and Human services on what we should be eating, has recommended that we eat less meat. But we love meat! you cry, possibly around a mouthful of carnitas burrito. And it's true. We Americans on average each shoved over two-hundred pounds of beef, poultry, pork and shellfish into our meat-holes last year.

So what's wrong with that? Well, probably a lot. Like, it's not always easy to dismiss the ethical issues that come along with eating meat. Even if you're humming The Circle of Life while you do it, you're still bolt-gunning a living creature and then feasting on its carcass.

On that subject, did anyone else think it was weird that the prey animals showed
up to be in the musical number about how their king will eventually kill and devour them?

"What the fuck America?"

-The DGAC

Anyway, the DGAC's recommendations aren't based on squishy human emotions, but on science. They looked at the nation's overall eating habits and concluded that we consume way too much saturated fat, sugar and sodium and that our physical activity levels are far too low. Basically they're calling us fat and lazy and suggesting that we eat more vegetables, all of which we've heard before. What's new is that for the first time the environmental impact of meat and dairy is being factored in. Livestock requires huge amounts of water and land and produces more greenhouse gases than cars and planes combined:

"The organically grown vegan diet also had the lowest estimated impact on resources and ecosystem quality...Beef was the single food with the greatest projected impact on the environment; other foods estimated to have high impact include cheese, milk and seafood."

-The Goddamned Hippies on the 

Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee

"To blandness!"

-Vegans

"But...meat? I mean, meat!"

-The Meat Industry

Ok, great, so the DGAC is going to recommend less reliance on animal products and vegans, animal rights proponents and people who enjoy breathing will cheer. What's the downside? Well, people who work in the meat industry aren't super-happy with the suggestion that we eat less meat, but then they wouldn't be, would they? In fact, The North American Meat Institute is outraged at that the DGAC and their new recommendations. Their beef...damnit, I swear I didn't mean that.

Wait, so she's the Meat Veep?
Was the Meat Science President busy?

Their issue is that they don't feel the DGAC is qualified to weigh environmental data since they're just a board of medical doctors and nutritionists, and hey, what do they know?

"It is not appropriate for the person designing a better light bulb to be telling Americans how to make a better sandwich. Sustainability is a complex issue better left to those with the necessary expertise."

-Dr. Betsy Booren, Ph.D.,
North American Meat Institute's
Vice President for Scientific Affairs

Thanks a lot, asshole.

See? Outrage. They're straight-up outraged that anyone dares suggest that animal products aren't awesome. Look, far be it from me to suggest that the Meat Institute might have a pro-meat bias, but c'mon, she's hardly going to say "go try the Tofurky." Of course they're not happy with the committee's recommendations, but you don't have to be an environmental scientist to read a report about how cows are basically the new Hummer when it comes to polluting emissions and that maybe cutting back a bit is in our best interests.

Besides, DGAC isn't saying you that can't eat meat and dairy ever again, they're just recommending that we maybe try and not pack our arteries so full of foie gras and Velveeta. Not just because it's better for the environment or for animals, but because they'd rather not see us keel over in our electric shopping carts onto the cold, linoleum tile floor of the cured meats aisle at Walmart. Is that so unreasonable?

Unreasonable? No. An uphill battle? Absolutely. 

Oh and on a side note...

...if you're anything like me you're probably just glad the DGAC isn't telling us we should all be eating insects. They are, it turns out, way better for the environment, require far less water and despite being stomach-churningly disgusting, are perfectly nutritious. Although, is it me, or has there a suspicious uptick in the number of articles and organizations pushing entomophagy? Like, do they know something we don't?

Oh right, the crippling drought. Hope you like cricket satay!

No cause for con-Cern.*

That sound you're hearing? That deafening thunder that seems to be approaching from all sides and feels like it's shaking you down to your constituent atoms and grinding time to a halt? That's just the sound of an artificial singularity consuming the Earth from the inside out. Yup, the Large Hadron Collider is back up and running.

"Thanks Obama..."

Visit beautiful Geneva, Switzerland,
you know, while it's still there.

So obviously that's a ridiculous scenario that can't possibly happen in real life (probably), but the Cern (which stands for the European Organization for Nuclear Research, because I don't know, French I guess) has finally turned the LHC back on after a two-year hiatus for maintenance and up-grades. And that's awesome. Hurray for the advancement of science. But does anyone else feel a little unsettled by the news that the LHC is doing whatever the hell it does again?

Sure, physicists were able to use the LHC to confirm the existence of the Higgs Boson particle which is great...I think. I mean, I get that it's a breakthrough in physics, but I can't even follow the goddamn Wikipedia page about it. For all I know, the thing could have opened a hell-portal and it's just taken two years to clean up all the corpses and blood.

Better get the hose.

"Relax, the LHC won't destroy the Earth. I mean, 
I don't think it will. Although, come to think of it, 
I'm not sure what a lot of this stuff does...so..."

Like, on a rational level, I can grasp Cern's assurances that the LHC is perfectly safe and isn't doing anything that hasn't already occurred in nature at exponentially greater energies, but I'm not a physicist or anything, so as much as I don't fully understand what it does, I also have a hard time wrapping my head around what it doesn't do. You know what I mean? Like, science really isn't in the business of saying things are impossible, just improbable, right? So we can't say the LHC won't create blackhole or a radiation burst that kills us all, we can only say that it's not statically likely.

What? It could be pudding. The point
is we won't know for sure until we
start smashing some particles together.

Look, just to be clear, I'm not putting on a tin-foil hat and hunkering down in my rapture shelter or anything, I'm just voicing an admittedly irrational concern. In fact, I am all for the LHC starting up again and scientists solving the mystery of dark matter or dark energy or pudding or whatever the hell is out there holding the universe together. It's important work and I'm glad to hear that they'll be back at it. It's just that I just want to be honest and admit that I have a healthy apprehension about, you know, the imploding. Is that crazy?


*also, I am very sorry about the title. Like, really sorry. You may have thought that I was better than that, but you would be mistaken.

Unbeliefable!

Above: are you goddamn kidding me?

So I swear that I'm almost done harping on this Indiana Religious Freedom Restoration Act horseshit. Like, I get that it's all but played out, and has been more or less relented on but for real, $842,592. Yes, I just said $842,592. Why did I just say $842,592? Oh, because that's how much how much money's been raised for the owner of a pizza shop in Walkerton, Indiana because she told the local news station:

Pictured: Indiana's richest idiot.

"If a gay couple was to come in like say we wanted-they wanted us to provide them pizzas for a wedding, um, we would have to say no...we're not discriminating against anyone. It's just that's our belief. Everyone has a right to believe anything."

-Crystal O'Connor, owner of Memories pizza, 

as well as a fuzzy definition 

of the word discrimination

"According to my faith, traditional pizza
is between a man and a woman."

I'm not, as you know, a biblical scholar, but nowhere, nowhere in the Bible does it say that Christians aren't allowed cater gay weddings. Nowhere. It says a lot of batty things, but not that. So while her personal belief may be that gay couples should be denied the sacrament of pizza, it's not a religious belief, it's just her being shitty. Anyway, she said this and some asshole threatened to burn her business down. In response, a GoFundme campaign was started to raise money "To relieve the financial loss endured by the proprietor's stand for faith."

"What? No, Jesus was't talking about an acutal
camel...uh, he meant, uh, mumble...mumble..."

-Christians with money

Ca-goddamn-ching. Way to go Twitter-user Jess Dooley, now O'Connor isn't just some homophobic business owner we could simply boycott when it comes time to order our traditional gay wedding pizza, she's a woman of conviction who took a stand for faith. And now she's eight-hundred thousand dollars richer. Hey, speaking of which, if she's serious about the whole religion thing, she has to give it all away, right? I certainly don't want to tell Crystal what to do with her threat-money, but while Jesus never said anything about gay people, he was very clear about rich people and how he's not so much a fan. 

Anyway, while Crystal O'Connor is kind of a horrible person for what she said and Jess Dooley is a kind of a psycho for threatening her, I'm going to go ahead and blame irresponsible journalism for this one. You see, no actual discrimination had even taken place yet. O'Connor never refused service to a gay couple, she just said she would. Here, check out this chyron from the ABC57 news story. Notice anything not true at all?

No. They plan to, but they haven't yet.

So why the shit was this a story in the first place? The answer is, of course, it's Indiana and there is absolutely nothing else going on. The local ABC affiliate just went around asking people how they felt about the RFRA and what she said was 'if a gay couple was to come in' she'd refuse service...you know, for Jesus. Of course her position doesn't make any sense, of course she's an ignorant jerk for saying she wouldn't cater a gay wedding, but holy shit, there was no story until ABC57 News came along. 

Above: the three reporters it took to report on something that
never even happened because journalism is alive in America.

Misao Okawa, we hardly knew ye!

Misao Okawa of Osaka, Japan, died today of natural causes. Specifically the natural cause of having been born in the 19th century. Like the 1800's. 1898 to be exact. Yeah, she was 117 years hold. Has your mind exploded yet?

Pictured: 19th century Osaka. Like, when she was
born, Samurai were still kind of a thing.

We can't rule anything out at this point...

No? Here, let me help. With the mind-exploding, I mean because you know what else exploded in 1898? The goddamn Maine. The American ship whose to-this-day-unexplained explodening in Havana harbor gave us the flimsy pretext we needed to start the Spanish-American war. I'm not saying that Okawa had anything to with it. Technically, she was born a month later and spent her entire life in Japan, but I'm also not saying that she didn't not have anything to do with it.

Above: Okawa being officially recognized
as the world's oldest human shortly after
Jiroemon Kimora's death. Coincidence?

Anyway, Misao Okawa officially became the world's oldest living person back in 2013 after the death of previous record holder Jiroemon Kimura, whose suspicious death remains unsolved.* Last year, on her 116th birthday (or eleventy-sixth in Hobbit reckoning) she shared the secret to her exceptionally long life with the Telegraph-as in the British newspaper, not an actual telegraph. With which I suppose she'd also be familiar...

"Eat and sleep and you will live a long time."

-Misao Okawa, a woman who predates

the airplane, clearly screwing with us

Yup, there you have it. Eating, sleeping and presumably the murder of anyone who stands in your way. Thanks Misao, we'll keep that in mind. Okay, so Okawa's passing leaves 116-year old American Gertrude Weaver as the world's newest, oldest person with fellow American Jeralean Talley a close second at age 115. Incidentally, if I were Weaver, I'd watch my back. Competitive aging seems to be a dangerous sport.

"There can be only one..." intoned Gertrude Weaver
menacingly after learning of Okawa's passing.

*well, not if you believe doctors. Although after what happened with the Maine, I wouldn't put anything past Misao Okawa.