Back in business

OK, I am now back in Arizona, after being back in Arizona for over a week now, which was after I spent two weeks in Iowa, which closely followed being still in Arizona and telling people I was going to Iowa for the winter break (which would usually cause people to tilt their head slightly) to spend time with my ex-wife (at this point, the people's head tilt would usually go past the point of a normal, comfortable tilt, stroll through the areas of an extreme, but still physically feasable tilt, decidedly march beyond the life-threatening tilt, and finally refuse to leave until a stikingly good argument for why it should do so has been made by a chiropractor).

Of course, while in Iowa I also spent a week with my <the English language does not have a word even remotely appropriate for our relationship> Maria. That was a lot of fun, except for the moment when she got 8 stiches on her finger for trying to convince a blender that "consumer awareness" should be a built in feature for all of the sharper kitchen appliances.

So, as I said, I am back in Arizona now, and am proud to say that I have finally found a difference between science and art. Trying to find something of sorts has been consuming my mind for a long time now, which puts "What is the difference between Art and Science?" right alongside questions like "Why are credit cards square?" and "How the hell can it rain so much in a desert?".

Anyway, the difference between science and art is the following. The ultimate goal of science is to digest the utterly incomprehensible into a form that even the most utterly stupid people can use. The utterly stupid people then try to use it to dominate the world, and someone ends up getting seriously hurt.

Art, on the other hand, produces things that no one really understands, so it doesn't really make anything any less incomprehensible. Consequently, no one gets seriously hurt. This of course allows for the due exception of occasional cases of involontary gagging and spontaneous vomiting.