Stuff I didn't write, but wished I had

Stuff I didn’t write, but wished I did

A Software Problem

Dear Sir:
Las year I upgraded Girlfriend 1.0 to Wife 1.0 and noticed that the new program began unexpected child processing that took up a lot of space and valuable resources. No mention of this phenomenon was included in the product brochure. In addition, wife 1.0 installs itself into all other programs and launches during system initialization where it monitors all other system activity. Applications such as Pokernight 10.3 and Beerbash 2.5 no longer run, crashing the system whenever selected. I cannot seem to purge Wife 1.0 from the system. I am thinking of going back to Girlfriend 1.0 but un-install does not work on this system.
Can you help me?
Dear Sir:
This is a very common problem men complain about but is mostly due to a primary misconception. Many people upgrade from Girlfriend 1.0 to Wife 1.0 with the idea that Wife 1.0 is merely a "Utilities and Entertainment" program. Wife 1.0 is an OPERATING SYSTEM and is designed by its creator to run everything. It is impossible to un-install, delete, or purge the program from the system once installed. You cannot go back to Girlfrield 1.0 because Wife 1.0 is not designed to do this. Some have tried to install Girlfriend 2.0 or Wife 2.0 but end up with more problems than the original system. Look in your manual under Warning-Alimony/Child Support. I recommend you keep Wife 1.0 and just deal with the situation. Having Wife 1.0 installed myself, I might also suggest you read the entire section regarding General Protection Faults (GPF’s). You must assume all responsibility for faults and problems that might occur. The best course of action will be to push apologize button then reset button as soon as lockup occurs. System will run smooth as long as you take the blame for GPG’s. Wife 1.0 is a great program but is very high maintenance.

Woman - A Chemical Analysis

Element: Woman
Symbol: Wo
Discoverer: Adam
Atomic Mass: Accepted at 53.6 kb, but known to vary from 40-200kg
Occurrences: Copious quantities in all urban areas.
Physical Properties:

1. Surface usually covered in painted film
2. Boils at nothing; freezes without known reason
3. Melts if given special treatment.
4. Bitter is incorrectly used.
5. Found in various states from virgin metal to common ore.
6. Yields if pressure applied in correct places.

Chemical Properties:

1. Has great affinity for gold, silver, and a range of precious stones.
2. Absorbs great quantities of expensive substances.
3. May explode spontaneously without prior warning and for no known reason.
4. Insoluble in liquids, but activity increase greatly by saturation in alcohol.
5. Most powerful money reducing agent known to man.

Common Uses:

1. Highly Ornamental, especially in sports cars.
2. Can be a great aid to relaxation.
3. Very effective cleaning agent.

Tests:

1. Pure specimen turns rosy pink when discovered in the natural state.
2. Turns green when placed beside a better specimen.

Hazards:

1. Highy dangerous except in experienced hands.
2. Illegal to possess more than one, although several can be maintained at different locations as long as specimens do not come into direct contact with each other.
3. Should you experience itching, burning or rash, discontinue use immediately and seek medical treatment.

Chemical Analysis of Man

Element:	Man
Symbol:	Ah (short for a**h***, a common French root used to identify the element)
Discover:	Eve
Atomic Mass:	Accepted at 7 inches, wavy brown hair, 6' 0" in length, though some isotopes can be as short as 4 inches yet weigh 200+ Kg
Occurrences:	Found following dual element Wo, often in high concentration near a perfectWo specimen. (Experimental evidence: any beach on any coast)

 

Physical properties:

Obnoxious when mixed with C*H*-OH (any alcohol) Tends to fall into very low energy state dirrectly after reaction with Wo (Snore ... zzzzz) Gains considerable mass as specimen ages, loses reactive nature. Rarely found in pure form after 14th year. Often damaged as a direct result of unlucky reaction with poluted form of the Wo common ore.

 

Chemical properties:

All forms desire reaction with Wo, even when no further reaction is possible. May react with several Wo isotopes in short period under extremely favorable conditions. Usually willing to react with what ever is available. Reaction Rates range from aborted/non- existant to Pre-interaction effects (which tend to turn the specimen bright red and send it to react with Sa, the sex analyst) Reaction styles vary from extremely slow, calm and wet to violent/bloody.

Storage:

Best results apparently near 18 for high reaction rate, 25-35 for favourable reaction style.

Uses:

Heavy boxes, top shelves, long walks late at night, free dinners for Wo...

Tests:

Pure specimen will rarely reveal purity, while reacted specimens broadcast information on many wavelengths.

Caution:

Tends to react extremely violently when other Man interferes with reaction to a particular Wo specimen. Otherwise very malleable under correct conditions.

Public Believes Scientists

The public usually believes anything, no matter how foolish, that a scientist tells it, according to recent research performed by Les Marsden of the J.T. Spaulding Institute.
Marsden conduced a series of tests with members of the general population. The subjects believed that they were answering an opinion survey about "recent scientific discoveries." Actually, they were responding to blatantly nonsensical "facts" that Marsden had concocted.
Among Marsden's findings: 78% of the subjects believed that "Venus orbits around Jupiter" after being told that "there is scientific proof." Before being told about this "scientific proof," 42% of the subjects believed this. 84% of the subjects believed that "reading books causes cancer" after they were told that "there is scientific proof." Before being told about this "scientific proof," only 5% of the subjects believed this. 63% of the subjects believed that "Apes have evolved from trees" after they were told that "there is scientific proof." Before being told about the "scientific proof," some 9% of the subjects believed this. Why God never received a PhD:
1. He had only one major publication.
   2. It was in Hebrew.
   3. It had no references.
   4. It wasn't published in a refereed journal.
   5. Some even doubt he wrote it by himself.
   6. It may be true that he created the world, but what has he done since then?
   7. His cooperative efforts have been quite limited.
   8. The scientific community has had a hard time replicating his results.
   9. He never applied to the ethics board for permission to use human subjects.
   10. When one experiment went awry he tried to cover it by drowning his subjects.
   11. When subjects didn't behave as predicted, he deleted them from the sample.
   12. He rarely came to class, just told students to read the book.
   13. Some say he had his son teach the class.
   14. He expelled his first two students for learning.
   15. Although there were only 10 requirements, most of his students failed his tests.
   16. His office hours were infrequent and usually held on a mountain top.
   17. No record of working well with colleagues.

The following list of phrases and their definitions might help you understand the mysterious language of science (including psychology) and medicine. These special phrases are also applicable to anyone reading a PhD dissertation or academic paper.
"IT HAS LONG BEEN KNOWN"... I didn't look up the original reference.
"A DEFINITE TREND IS EVIDENT"... These data are practically meaningless.
"WHILE IT HAS NOT BEEN POSSIBLE TO PROVIDE DEFINITE ANSWERS TO THE QUESTIONS"... An unsuccessful experiment, but I still hope to get it published.
"THREE OF THE SAMPLES WERE CHOSEN FOR DETAILED STUDY"... The other results didn't make any sense.
"TYPICAL RESULTS ARE SHOWN"... This is the prettiest graph.
"THESE RESULTS WILL BE IN A SUBSEQUENT REPORT"... I might get around to this sometime, if pushed/funded.
"IN MY EXPERIENCE"... Once
"IN CASE AFTER CASE"... Twice
"IN A SERIES OF CASES"... Thrice
"IT IS BELIEVED THAT"... I think.
"IT IS GENERALLY BELIEVED THAT"... A couple of others think so, too.
"CORRECT WITHIN AN ORDER OF MAGNITUDE"... Wrong.
"ACCORD1NG TO STATISTICAL ANALYSIS"... Rumour has it.
"A STATISTICALLY-ORIENTED PROJECTION OF THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THESE FINDINGS"... A wild guess.
"A CAREFUL ANALYSIS OF OBTAINABLE DATA"... Three pages of notes were obliterated when I knocked over a glass of beer.
"IT IS CLEAR THAT MUCH ADDITIONAL WORK WILL BE REQUIRED BEFORE A COMPLETE UNDERSTANDING OF THIS PHENOMENON OCCURS"... I don't understand it
"AFTER ADDITIONAL STUDY BY MY COLLEAGUES"... They don't understand it either.
"THANKS ARE DUE TO JOE BLOGGS FOR ASSISTANCE WITH THE EXPERIMENT AND TO CINDY ADAMS FOR VALUABLE DISCUSSIONS"... Mr. Bloggs did the work and Ms. Adams explained to me what it meant.
"A HIGHLY SIGNIFICANT AREA FOR EXPLORATORY STUDY"... A totally useless topic selected by my committee.
"IT IS HOPED THAT THIS STUDY WILL STIMULATE FURTHER 1NVESTIGATION IN THIS FIELD"... I quit.

Where to Publish Your Paper1) If you understand it and can prove it, then send it to a journal of mathematics.
2) If you understand it, but can't prove it, then send it to a physics journal.
3) If you can't understand it, but can prove it, then send it to an economics journal.
4) If you can neither understand it nor prove it, then send it to a psychology journal.
5) If it attempts to make something important out of something trivial, then send it to a journal of education.
6) If it attempts to make something trivial out of some-thing important, send it to a journal of metaphysics.