Philosophical Musings

Who exactly was it who robbed Peter to pay Paul?


Forget the incongruity of Mary being a virgin,
forget whether Jesus was married or was a brothel botherer,
forget the Illuminati and the Knights Templars,
forget the question of whether the dude who designed the Pope's hat was taking the piss,

the real Biblical mystery......apart from the epic question of how many people got to lick Lot's wife......

is the identity of the dude who stole some denarii from Peter and gave the said denarii to Paul.


There are other questions related to this mysterious even also.


For example, why was Paul being paid? It seems before conversion he was a Roman tent-maker called Saul. Now was that money the price of a tent? Why did anyone need a tent in Jerusalem, never mind Damascus or Rome? And why did he change his name?


And what about Peter? It seems he was a fisherman called Simon before all the hallelujah business. So why was he carrying the money anyway? Was it for a new boat? And why did he change his name?


But by the time Saul became Paul, Peter was an old duffer and ergo retired...in fact the Romans kicked Peter's bucket in AD 64 and Paul's at around the same time. So it can be reasonably assumed that Peter did not need money for a boat. So, what did he need the money for?


And how much was stolen anyway?


What did the police report say?



And to top it all, it seems that Peter himself owed the Romans some denarii, which is why said Romans crucified him upside down hoping that the denarii would fall out of the pockets of Peter's loincloth.



There is something very fishy...and not least because Peter was a fisherman......I smell a conspiracy.



Come on all you Biblical historian types.



We need to be told.



Why can't Telugu architects make two consecutive steps of the same size?


I mean seriously, how difficult is it? Them ancient and medieval types managed to build palaces, tombs, forts etc. So how come the modern ones suck at stairs?


The Kannada ones seem to manage fine, the Delhi ones work pretty well, even those lazy ass Bong ones mange to do it, so why not Telugus?


They happily go around building lavatories for pigeons (statues to you and me), airports, buildings etc.


But when it comes to making two consecutive steps of the same size, somehow all their intelligence, skills, architectural knowledge fly away in a way reminiscent of my courage when confronted by an angry She Who Must Be Obeyed.


Who decided to make vodka from potatoes?


Look at it this way.


Making alcohol out of wheat, rye, barley, grapes etc is nothing compared to making it out of potato.



Think about it, one fine day, some dude gets up, picks up a potato,and thinks, I won't boil it, I won't fry it, I won't mash it, instead I will make vodka out of it.


I mean what kind of lateral out of the box thinking genius can come up with something like that. Forget Da Vinci or Archimedes or McGyver, when it comes to creating magic, noone can beat his fella.


So who was he?


We need to be told.



What happened to the apple?


We all know the story of the apple falling on Newton and from that the epic nerd discovering gravity. But do we know what happened to the apple.


I mean that apple is a historical artefact with more actual value than even the Ark of the Covenant.


So what happened to it?


Did Newton eat it raw? Did he give it to his landlady to make a pie? Or a tart? Did he nonchalantly throw it away and did a passing goat eat it?


Come on historians, pull up yer pants, what happened to that apple?


We need to know.


Why do males have nipples?


Seriously, can anyone answer that?


The survival of the mammal species dictate that females need to have them. Not only are they essential to feed the wee ones, adult men (and lesbians) seem to have way too much fun with them (and the surrounding areas). 


But as far as males are concerned, they serve no purpose....apart from handing footy defenders another way to hurt opposition strikers (if you have ever played footy and have not suffered a nippletwitch/burn/pinch during a corner or a free kick then you are one lucky bastard).


Nipples (on men) can't even be termed vestigial organs coz

a. they are not organs
b. nowhere in the evolutionary spectrum has males ever had to produce milk, so they have always been useless


Forget humans, even them primates like the gorillas seem to have them. And there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that male gorillas have any use for them either.

So, why are they here?


Them anthropologist dudes need to find out.


We need to be told.


and finally


Why is Kalou?


Why? Just why??? Why???????