nihil obstat

Don't ask for the facts unless you want the truth.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?
Friday, August 16, 2002
nothing funny about sacrilege

more work for Mr. Serafin .... I wonder if ONION knows HTML.

from Kross & Sweord:

"... find ammusing this type of sacrilege. "

"Danger! Falling Brainwaves" is another new parishioner - I don't think these errors are that bad:

"... I had some sense the the Church's teachings weren't really being taught."
"... Gregory Popcak on pre-nuptual agreements."
"... having a lay-goverened Church ..."

Pooper Scooper

Gregory Poopchek spent so much time and effort on trying to find a husband for Emily Stimpson
that he missed these two blatant boo-boos:


For the (gazillion + 1)th time, it's Mahony.

The article is in the New Times of Los Angeles (an "alternative" newspaper), not the Los Angeles Times.

Thursday, August 15, 2002
nothing to Luse by Apologia

from a newly discovered Catholic blog (yes, another one for Mr. Serafin's list) :

"molestors" (3 times)
"... monastic communites ..."
"... they are pschologically immature ..."
"Pehaps I'm missing something here ..." (indeed you are)
"If he wants to effect the return ..."
"... anathema to consevative principles ..."
"If the group feels itself beseiged ..."
"... it is remarkably well written for a beaureaucratic exercise ..."
"Of course, when you're an atheist, everthing is a myth ..."
"... the moral contraints that had governed my life in the past ..."
"... a religion requires an indentifiable institution ..."
"Which was itelf constructed ..."
"If an animal that he's harrassing bites him ..."
"I've heard some people take out cemetary plots."
"We will therefore exchew purely private conversations ..."

UPDATE: The blog has (temporarily?) moved here.

Wednesday, August 14, 2002
I'm a proofreader that likes to find ...

... errors like the following from a fairly new blog:

"In preparation for the upcomming celebration ..."
"... ploting our trip ..."
"... one or two trees within eye sight.
"... I’m a tad on the Closterphobic side."
"Who would have guessed that I have the same temperment as the prophet Nathan and Tom Selleck?"
"... an article discusing Sam and Bethany Torode's book ..."
"... a nice introduction to an fairly unique director."

Tuesday, August 13, 2002
Correct spelling never goes out of style.

I have no doubt whatsoever that Alexandra's mother would have noticed these atrocities:

"... when it ceases to be 'contemperary' ..."
"... but I was intruiged with the 'Contemperary' hymns section."

I'll have to pin the following faux pas on the blogger software:

"posted by Alexandra Baldwin at Monday, August 12, 2002"

Is this a mere coincidence? Click on the "07/07/2002 - 07/13/2002" archive links on this blog and on hers.

UPDATE: In this bizarre post, Alexandra fantasizes about taking me "down a peg",
says I had to "comb through" her blog to find an error (those mistakes were in the latest post!),
refers to me as "he", then states that her mother thinks I'm Doreen!

UPDATE 2: Alexandra's mom joins the fun!
(Do you think Thomas Paine was a liar and a coward?)
Speaking of "mis-identifications", I only had to check the first sentence of the first post in the archive:
"Our copy of 'Goodbye, Good Men' by Micheal S. Rose is here ..."

Sunday, August 11, 2002
I interpret statistics carefully, why doesn't everyone?

from this post at a new blog:

The methodological strength of the studies on condoms to reduce the risk of HIV/AIDS
transmission far exceeds that for other STDs. There is demonstrated exposure to HIV/AIDS
through sexual intercourse with a regular partner (with an absence of other HIV/AIDS
risk factors). Longitudinal studies of HIV- sexual partners of HIV+ infected cases
allow for the estimation of HIV/AIDS incidence among condom users and condom non-users.
From the two incidence estimates, consistent condom use decreased the risk of HIV/AIDS
transmission by approximately 85%. These data provide strong evidence for the
effectiveness of condoms for reducing sexually transmitted HIV.

I wonder how many people (especially teenagers) are running around believing they are
having "safe sex" when there's still a 15% chance of them getting HIV? "

First and obviously, there is a 0% chance of HIV transmission occurring between two HIV- partners.
Second, an 85% reduction in the risk of HIV transmission with condom usage does NOT mean that
there is a 15% chance of transmission.
As an example, if it was determined that a couple in which one partner was HIV+ had a 6% chance of
transmission by a single act of sexual intercourse, then the risk would be 0.9% if a condom was used.