![Challenge Entry: General election: Photoshop Labour [challenge entry]](/images/board_posticon_c.gif)

From the General election: Photoshop Labour challenge. See all 346 entries (closed)
( , Wed 14 Apr 2010, 14:57, archived)

if we all come at the same time the sea-level will rise by 2 metres or something
( ,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 14:59,
archived)

each depositing 5 ml of population paste = 15 million litres (or 6 olympic-sized swimming pools). Divide 1000 to make cubic metres and then by 2/3 * 510,072,000,000,000 m^2 (area of surface area of the Earth * 2/3 for the liquid bit) and that gives a sea-level rise of 4.4 x 10^-11 m, or a little over 1/2 the distance between the atoms of hydrogen and oxygen in a water molecule.
(edit: 1/2, not 1/20 of the distance.)
( ,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 15:08,
archived)
(edit: 1/2, not 1/20 of the distance.)

YAH BOO!
actually I'm amazed you did that!
( ,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 15:09,
archived)
actually I'm amazed you did that!

My member is horribly flayed.
( ,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 15:12,
archived)

Archie - quick question for you: Human Target - opinions?
( ,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 15:17,
archived)

I shall *consult* the internet and let you know.
your thoughts?
( ,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 15:19,
archived)
your thoughts?

I'd say it's worth your time. Ep 7 was a bit weak, overall pretty good. Lots of familiar faces front and behind the camera, too. 24 bods directing, Guest stars we all know (and love), etc etc.
I always like to sense check against your unerring taste, sir.
( ,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 15:22,
archived)
I always like to sense check against your unerring taste, sir.

I have a suspicion it might be massively trippy and have apples in it
( ,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 15:30,
archived)

leave it with me, with give it a suitable gander, squire
( ,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 15:33,
archived)

yes but once the MP Expenses rules on 2nd homes start there will be a glut of them on the market
( ,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 15:21,
archived)

The logo was a cock. I must see if I can find it.
( ,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 15:12,
archived)

as "an inconvience". Only if it happens on the tube, no?
( ,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 15:15,
archived)

Better than my last paper: pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/cg9015349
( ,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 15:18,
archived)

you are Poindexter AICMFP :)
( ,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 15:22,
archived)

In my field we had some fucking losers whose names I won't mention (step forward Katherine Freese) calling a "model" after the fucking Cardassians. WHO SAID COSMOLOGISTS AREN'T FUNNY *Hnnrk hnnrk*
Not that that's a comment on Boris' title.
( ,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 15:28,
archived)
Not that that's a comment on Boris' title.

Except a few choice choices who are quite lovely.
( ,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 15:34,
archived)

Although my paper did get the 1st hit on google for that word...
( ,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 15:33,
archived)

one of my papers comes out first hit from google for a phrase in its title too. it's not *that* small a field. (i'll resist the urge to post anything more since i quite like the facade of anonymity here and there's only three authors on the paper.)
( ,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 15:36,
archived)

you should do some research into that and publish a paper
( ,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 15:38,
archived)

though I'm in theory so 1-5 is more normal. My average is probably 2. In observational work you're beginning to look at about 100 authors.
A very quick hunt threw up this one with 34 authors, arxiv.org/abs/1003.0270
( ,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 15:40,
archived)
A very quick hunt threw up this one with 34 authors, arxiv.org/abs/1003.0270

Mind you, I find the tradition in the sciences of senior members of staff getting authorship despite having made no material contribution insane.
I much prefer the humanities approach: you fuck off and write something, and possibly mention someone in the footnotes if you can remember their name.
( ,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 15:47,
archived)
I much prefer the humanities approach: you fuck off and write something, and possibly mention someone in the footnotes if you can remember their name.

the conclusion was that the current system in our field is fucking lunatic but there's no easy way of dealing with it, and no good way of controlling senior professors getting their names added regardless of whether they've done anything or not.
( ,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 15:52,
archived)

who was a senior medical person from somewhere-or-other.
The publications section was 45 pages long.
Something tells me that he didn't have much involvement in most of the papers cited.
( ,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 15:55,
archived)
The publications section was 45 pages long.
Something tells me that he didn't have much involvement in most of the papers cited.

Yay me!
*crys a little*
( ,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 15:41,
archived)
*crys a little*

I don't think it's actually *publishable* but if I made it publishable it'd be about 60 or 70 pages long and, frankly, fuck that for a lark. So I'm splitting it in two.
( ,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 15:45,
archived)

I don't really like it any other way...
( ,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 15:48,
archived)

But I have used awful puns.
And I know for a fact that there are several degree programmes and government or EU-funded projects that got their titles because of the need for a good acronym.
( ,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 15:35,
archived)
And I know for a fact that there are several degree programmes and government or EU-funded projects that got their titles because of the need for a good acronym.

"Cosmological Unity and the Next Telescopic Surveys", which will be about the need for cosmologists to carefully plan future ground-based surveys to maximise the useful data we can recover from them without all the fractious bickering and girlish arguments that normally split these efforts apart.
( ,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 15:38,
archived)

trying to design a Masters course that'd fit around the acronym WEASEL.
We failed. But we did get a pub quiz team name.
( ,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 15:40,
archived)
We failed. But we did get a pub quiz team name.

different field. i'll get away with it :)
I'd make one around "wankers" but that K is a killer.
( ,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 15:43,
archived)
I'd make one around "wankers" but that K is a killer.

"Killing" would work but has to be followed by "vector" or "tensor". "Kretschmann" would work but has to be followed by "scalar", "curvature" or "invariant". (Actually I'm buggerd if I know what the Kretschmann scalar for cosmology is. Quite possibly it's even zero.) There's a stupid theory called Kruskaton cosmology but I think may actually be spelled Cruscaton.
Edit: Hmmm. Waves, Anisotropies and Null-surfaces in Kundt-Einstein Riemannian Spacetimes. That one *almost* works and gives us an added "Kundt" in the title, but it's damn near meaningless.
( ,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 15:47,
archived)
Edit: Hmmm. Waves, Anisotropies and Null-surfaces in Kundt-Einstein Riemannian Spacetimes. That one *almost* works and gives us an added "Kundt" in the title, but it's damn near meaningless.

I might email Katherine Freese and suggest a follow-up to the Cardassian model. They called it that because it "takes over the universe" and ends up dominating all other matter. Perhaps something that starts to take over the universe but then settles down would be a Klingon model.
This has legs.
( ,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 16:05,
archived)
This has legs.

"The authors wish to thank Griffy Savalas for useful and constructive discussions."
( ,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 16:17,
archived)

NOW MUSLIMS SAY THERE IS NO LINK BETWEEN WANKING AND RISE IN SEA LEVEL
( ,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 15:20,
archived)

But I am impressed by it regardless. Let's have more posts like this and less of the shit ones.

but I'm sure it could produce a rise in local water levels
nb. me and the gf managed to get places in the Vierdaagse, so we will be plaguing your countrymen with rubbish Dutch
( ,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 15:25,
archived)
nb. me and the gf managed to get places in the Vierdaagse, so we will be plaguing your countrymen with rubbish Dutch