noncon4mist.com


Archive for the ‘Funny Observations’


Candid Camera Conformity 0

Posted on April 10, 2011 by noncon
Bookmark and Share

I love this Candid Camera video that demonstrates how impressionable we are, and how we will conform to stop looking foolish. And yet most of the comments on YouTube for this video are from people claiming they themselves would not succumb to this sort of peer pressure. Most are wrong. No matter how rebellious people think they are, there will be many social areas in which they will want to fit right in, because they are scared of others thinking they are stupid or ignorant. Marketing experts know this only too well, because if people were not this insecure, advertising would never work, and companies wouldn’t spend billions on it every years.

Enjoy.

Gold, Swimming Pools and Prof Brian Cox 1

Posted on March 16, 2011 by noncon
Bookmark and Share

So Brian Cox (that’s PROF Brian Cox, not Brian Cox the actor) says all the gold ever mined in the world wouldn’t fill three Olympic sized swimming pools. At first, that seemed unbelieveable, but when you think about it, olympic sized swimming pools are bloody huge!

But some people will just tweet the first thing that pops into their heads and say someone’s talking rubbish, without checking the facts first:

burt_dawg: @ProfBrianCox all the gold ever being mined fitting into 3 swimming pools is surely rubbish?! how do you explain wedding rings/gold bars!

ProfBrianCox: @burt_dawg Why not look it up rather than simply express an opinion – how about Google?

Also, when you think about it; most stuff made out of gold is tiny.

If you were to melt it all, it would be tinier still.

Most gold is not pure gold, which is determined by how many carrots, sorry carats.

Wonder how many carrots would fit into three olympic sized swimming pools? And what would the difference be if you were to grate or mash the carrots, then condense them with three giant condensers?….

My Chair Wants To Say Something 0

Posted on January 16, 2011 by noncon
Bookmark and Share

3D zeros

This is what I found when I looked at my screen a few mintues ago. I was editing a word document and got up to check a paper document filed away, leaving the arm of  my chair apparently on the zero key!

I was only away a few seconds, but this was the number of zeros it had typed before I moved the chair away from the keyboard. I didn’t count them before deleting it (which I could have done easily in Word’s tools), so you’ll have to count them yourself. I wonder if my chair was trying to tell me something; like how many people laugh at my jokes, or how many non$p*mming people will visit the site this week, or how much money I’m gonna make if my musical ever gets made.

What you might find disturbing though is; I found that if you stare at the image for a few seconds (click to zoom), it has the optical illusion of being in 3D. Seriously. Some whole vertical strips appear to be nearer to you than others, then when you look again, different rows of zeros are now in front. And then there’s the way the ones in the middle appear bigger than the rest… This is where a person with ADHD can waste a lot of time…

Why Do Dogs Wag Their Tails? 0

Posted on November 10, 2010 by noncon
Bookmark and Share

This morning I greeted my dog Sadie (a mixed race mut, believed to be staffy and German Shepherd) in the usual way. I said “Hellooo!” in that special sing-song voice reserved only for animals and toddlers, and she returned the greeting in her own wag-tail way.

It made me think that I’ve probably never been as nice to humans as I am to dogs. Is that terrible? Or is it a blessing, seeing as I would probably be arrested if I was? What if we stroked people’s hair (personal hygiene standards permitting)? Or if we gently rubbed people’s hands if we think they are nice, whether or not we actually know them? God – the thought is making me feel sick.

Amazingly, dogs have their own versions of social etiquette by use of their tails. Most people think they only wag their tales when they are happy. Not so. All the dogs I have known (a lot) have wagged their tails when they were:

  • happy
  • guilty
  • not sure what you mean, but are willing to appear as if they do

which makes me convinced that a tail wag is a dog’s equivalent of our smile, which, don’t forget, we also do when we are embarrassed and uncomfortable. So there you have it. That is why dogs wag their tails.

Why the Internet is like Time Travel 0

Posted on October 13, 2010 by noncon
Bookmark and Share

backbuttonHave you ever noticed the similarities between the internet and time travel?

No?

Well, if you go back in time and do not change anything, everything will continue to happen as it is supposed to, in order to have everything the same in the present. But if you change something when you go back in time, you will alter the space-time continuum and the present has the potential to be very different.

When you press the back button in your browser (or on your mouse if it is posh like mine) once or several times, as long as you don’t click anything else, you can click the forward button to get back to the most current page. But if you click something – you change the landscape of history FOREVER!

Just something I noticed.

Why the Internet is like Time Travel

Have you ever noticed the similarities between the internet and time travel?

No?

Well, if you go back in time and do not change anything, everything will continue to happen as it is supposed to, in order to have everything the same in the present. But if you change something when you go back in time, the present has the potential to be very different.

When you press the back button in your browser (or on your mouse if it is posh like mine) once or several times, as long as you don’t click anything else, you can click the forward button to get back to the most current page. But if you click something – you change the landscape of history FOREVER!

Two TV License Stories 0

Posted on September 16, 2010 by noncon
Bookmark and Share

tv licence storiesI was on a train this afternoon (on my own) and was sat near a group of about six people. They were talking about the British TV License (Licence UK sp). Basically for those of you who don’t know; anyone who owns a TV in the UK has to pay £145.00 a year for a TV license, or they can be fined up to £1000.00. The BBC (that has no advertising) is totally funded by the TV license.

One of the group confessed he had never had a TV license before or since he was married, and does not plan to get one either. His friends argued that the cost of the license for everyone else is so high because of people like him who refuse to pay.  He then put forward the argument that he should not have to pay for a TV license because he does not watch BBC channels; only the other commercial channels. And he then reamed off the programs he likes to watch, and of the ones I’d heard of, they all seemed to be on terrestrial UK commercial channels.

His friends could not believe he doesn’t watch a single BBC program and quizzed him saying stuff like “what, you don’t watch sport on the BBC?”, “you don’t watch The News?”, “not even Doctor Who?” He still claimed he didn’t. Then after a long list of programs, he declared “The only BBC program I have seen in years is Hustle”.

A drama about a group of con artists.

I think only one member of the group saw the irony, but this particular statement quite tickled me, and I had to do that thing where you feign a coughing fit to try and cover up your stifled giggles. Serves me right for listening in, I guess. Despite being a nonconformist in many areas, I conform to buying a TV license as it’s cheaper than a £400 fine, which a friend of mine once had to pay.

Which reminds me of another funny story. A few weeks after my friend got fined in 1991, an annoying relative invited me to go out, and I was not in the mood to go out with them, so I made up the story that I could not afford to go out as I had just been fined £400 for not having a TV licence. (I had got a TV licence).

I had only wanted to stop them badgering me to go out, but my tale of expense also forced them to rush out and buy a TV licence themselves! Some fibs get you double points.

Andrew Scott: Ant and Dec’s Lovechild? 2

Posted on August 10, 2010 by noncon
Bookmark and Share

Ant and Dec's Baby: Andrew ScottMy friend was one of the extras in Sherlock (2010)  so I watched it and even though she wasn’t in the last episode, I was still intrigued enough to watch as the “moriachi” result of the first episode wasn’t explained.

I’m sure we were supposed to be scared by the villain Moriachi (Mariachi?), but I was too distracted by how much he looked like both Ant and Dec! If Ant and Dec had a baby boy, this is how I reckon he would look when he grew up (although that’s impossible of course… he’s  only a year younger than Ant and Dec ;)  )

Anyone with me on that?

You’d think I didn’t have any work to do from the image above (Heaven forbid anyone should ever come between Ant and Dec).

No Bored Singers Allowed! 0

Posted on April 04, 2010 by noncon
Bookmark and Share

More interesting observations on Musicians-in-your-city.co.uk/mids/agbs.cfm?land=uk. This site gets better!

On its T&C it requires vocalists to sing down the phone to give a sample of their voices BUT states:

“Singers and vocalists who record unmotivated/bored voice samples shall also face deactivation of their account.”

Wouldn’t that exclude an awful lot of commercially successful singers whose deliberate style is such? Every indie band I can think of sounds bored. That’s the style. God, almost every 80s artist sounded bored as hell. Depeche Mode, The Pet Shop Boys, The Smiths, Japan, The Cure, Pulp, and David Bowie (to name but a few) certainly wouldn’t be allowed to register on this site!

Isn’t it also subjective whether someone is unmotivated or bored-sounding?

And why would they care whether someone does sound bored when singing? Are they assuming that these people are just ringing up for a laugh? You have to pay to join, so that doesn’t make sense.

What if an indie band are looking for a bored sounding singer?

I think this is a ridiculous rule. The site is based in Germany despite having sister sites worldwide. Well it couldn’t be British, could it, with a rule like that?

Funny Spelling Mistakes 1 0

Posted on April 04, 2010 by noncon
Bookmark and Share

OK I know everyone makes typos and spelling mistakes, and the internet is crawling with them, but sometimes I find spelling mistakes that make me laugh as they can often be ironic or have a double meaning. Here’s one I just found at Musicians-in-your-city.co.uk.

A local band advertised themselves online with these compelling words:

“are aim is to make music that is true and real.. we have a wealth of experience accross the bored.. style/ country rock/blues. semi pro”

Although there are several mistakes it was “across the BORED” that made me chuckle – especially as they’re performing musicians.

Perfect Poached Eggs Without Vinegar! 0

Posted on November 22, 2009 by noncon
Bookmark and Share

Those egg poaching pans with the little plastic dishes are useless for poaching eggs. You have to grease the plastic, which defeats the object of using no fat. then if you want a runny yolk, you’ll have to put up with runny whites too unless you want to wait half an hour.

And poaching eggs in a saucepan is no good either. You need a frying pan, in fact the perfect poached egg looks exactly like a fried egg should, but without the oil.

There is a huge poached egg / vinegar myth – you do NOT need any! Who the hell thought of that? It’s supposed to bind the egg, but eggs can bind perfectly well on their own, and the vinegar makes the eggs stink!

I manage to make perfect poached eggs every day using a frying pan, hot water and no vinegar, and yet whenever I stay in hotels I get qualified chefs telling me you HAVE to add vinegar to the water to poach eggs. I’ve even been inside the kitchens twice to prove you don’t need a saucepan or vinegar! Did they knock anything off the bill for my expertise – no chance!

If I’m having egg with chips (fries) then I won’t mind the taste or smell of vinegar, but vinegar has no place at the breakfast table, thank you.

Just a bit of salt to bring the water to the boil quicker is all that is needed. Then you just add your egg to boiling water in a non-stick frying pan and cover with a pan lid.

Once it tries to or does boil over, turn the heat down and do your toast.

X Factor’s Sacrificial Lambs 1

Posted on November 02, 2009 by noncon
Bookmark and Share
X Factor's Little Lambs John and Edward

X Factor's Little Lambs John and Edward

When I first heard that Louie invited John and Edward to be part of the live shows, I was perplexed as they clearly cannot sing, and their choreography timing is atrocious – they’re more dyspraxic than I am!

But then I remembered what I was told by someone who worked in television when Same Difference were in a similar position as John and Edward today. The only aim of the show is to make money. Advertising revenue only goes so far and the money to be made from the act who actually wins cannot be determined beforehand. But the phone lines are what shows like this are all about.

What better way to explode the number of phone calls the show will get from the public, than to throw in an untalented act to cause anger and controversy among the public?

John and Edward were specifically chosen for their ability to divide the nation. They had everything that a Sacrificial Lamb act needs:

1. For a start, not only can they not sing in tune, but they have very little strength in their voices (which if they cannot sing in tune, is a great blessing).

2. They were also twin brothers, which is seen as both cutesy and annoyingly sad and embarrassing, depending on your views.

3. They are young and naive, and don’t know they are untalented – perfect! The show can take the piss as much as they like, and the boys won’t even know!

4. They are also good looking enough to ensure thousands of teenage girls will be running up mum and dad’s phone bills.

So Simon Cowell and Louie Walsh agree beforehand that if such an act comes along, “grab em quick so we can clean up!” They must have thought it was Christmas when John and Edward came along and ticked all the boxes.

So with the twins’ only talent for frightening and angering people, the stage is set. Because there are so many more talented people in the competition, the family and supporters of the acts that really do have talent are incensed more and more each week that the boys stay in the competition. And they do everything in their power to get as many people to vote for their loved ones and try to give the twins the boot.

Several exceptionally talented acts have already been victims of this cruel TV practice including the brilliant Rachel Adedeji. But as they went out due to not enough public votes, it’s not a case of a potential winner losing out to this practice – unless they actually win!

The thing that confirmed this theory for me was last week when it was Big Band week. Louie could so easily have given the boys a classic big band song and got the lads to dress up smart and just stand and sing, but no. The boys are now a circus act, so the more vomit inducing colorful dancers there are, the better. The more dancing the twins have to do the better – they’ll be even more out of breath and the poor singing will be even worse. Also the less serious the song the better. ‘She Bangs’ by Ricky Martin was the perfect song to maximize ridicule for the Grimes brothers.

I actually wonder if the female judges are even in on this conspiracy. Dannii shakes her head in despair before remembering to continue the diplomatic charade. Cheryl in particular seems to genuinely believe that Louie is in love with Jedward as they are now known. Then again, Simon will probably have instructed the judges all to act their socks off when commenting on John and Edward’s performances. But comments like “Out of all the acts, yours is the one I most look forward to” tells me Cheryl’s no actress.

I doubt the Grimes can win, but what do I know? Is it possible that the Sacrificial Lambs could sacrifice the integrity of The X Factor itself and actually win? It would be horrific, but kind of a strange karma for the show to have its plan backfire.

Incorrect Shaving Myth 0

Posted on October 23, 2009 by noncon
Bookmark and Share

shaving-myth

I heard that old overused myth again the other day about hair growing back thicker if you shave. A woman told her twelve year old daughter she should not shave her legs because the hairs will grow back as thick as her father’s beard.

It was the first time I had met this woman and she was in front of her whole family, so I didn’t correct her (I would have done a few years ago when I was a bigger nonconformist). But if a person, male or female, shaves any part of their body; legs, face, anywhere; the only thing that will happen is that the new hairs will grow back with a blunt end instead of a fine tapered end.

Shaving never causes hairs to grow back thicker for as long as you live. Here’s a few more incorrect myths including that one.

Here’s a shaving fact that isn’t a myth: A money saving tip (or should that be money shaving tip?) would be to ditch your overpriced shaving foam or shaving cream. Use hair conditioner instead – all it has to do is soften the hair and skin, and hair conditioner does that perfectly well, at a fraction of the price.



↑ Top