It’s too bad Jonathan I. Katz, the Washington University physics professor who wrote a whole paper defending homophobia and describes himself as a “proud … homophobe,” had to get kicked off Obama’s BP oil spill clean up team last year for being an asshole. Because he found the secret to plugging the massive Gulf Of Mexico oil spill that could’ve shed weeks off the contamination! And his solution even has a cute name: “oobleck.”
Katz, who describes homophobia as a perfectly acceptable practice that’s merely a “moral judgement upon acts engaged in by choice,” and calls on gays to “forever suppress these desires,” says oobleck — a combination of cornstarch and water — could have sealed that oil spill up like a butt plug in an asshole. That because, as NPR notes, when the material “moves slowly, it flows like a liquid. Move it fast, and it freezes into a solid.” And it would work like so:
The problem, as Katz saw it, was that oil and gas blasting up the well tended to break up the drilling mud into fine particles, and a light mist like that ends up getting shot up the pipe and dumped onto the seafloor. Katz wondered whether there was some kind of fluid that wouldn’t immediately be dispersed into tiny particles when it encountered the rapidly flowing oil. “I realized after a while that cornstarch suspension — oobleck, the kids call it — has this wonderful property that if it’s not flowing rapidly, it’s a liquid that flows pretty well,” Katz says. “But if you try to make it flow rapidly, it suddenly turns stiff and it doesn’t flow at all.”
Oobleck versus a stream of bubbling hot oil? Really? Yep.
“I made some rough estimates; it looked like it was going to work,” Katz says. And Katz had an inside track here — being on the energy secretary’s advisory panel, he participated in daily telephone briefings and frequent e-mail exchanges. He had about as much access as you could hope. “So I certainly sent it to everybody on the lists. I don’t know who read it — you can never tell,” he says. […] Cornstarch is cheap, but the rest of the operation would not be. “And of course the drilling mud industry isn’t used to mixing cornstarch into their stuff, so it was completely new for them,” he says. “It wasn’t something they had available in their tanks ready to go. They would have had to prepare a custom solution and take it out to the well.”
But would it have really worked? Katz says yeppers.
[A]fter BP stopped the well through more conventional means, Katz and some associates at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory did a small-scale experiment with the cornstarch mixture and mineral oil. They report in that Physical Review Letters article that it performed as Katz had predicted under these highly idealized circumstances. Whether it would have worked in the real world is an open question. Prof. Steve Wereley, who teaches fluid dynamics at Purdue University, says the concept is clever. “The problem with using something like cornstarch and water is getting it where it needs to be,” Wereley says. You’d have to pump a lot of it, fast, into the well if it’s going to work. And there might be trouble pumping it — remember, oobleck gets stiff when it’s put under pressure. “It would tend to create that same reaction when you’re trying to pump it down the hole.” Wereley calculates that you’d have to pump it so slowly that you couldn’t get it down the hole faster than the oil was rushing up. And that’s a big problem.
BP, meanwhile, says it looked into Katz’s research and concluded oobleck would never do the job. So I guess it’s back to test tubes, beakers, and bullshit for Katz: “What of those cursed with unnatural sexual desires? Must they forever suppress these desires? Yes, but this is hardly a unique fate. Almost everyone has desires which must be suppressed. Most men and women think adulterous thoughts fairly often, and find themselves attracted to members of the opposite sex to whom they are not married. Morality requires them to suppress these desires, and most do not commit adultery, though they feel lust in their hearts. Almost everyone, at one time or another, covets another’s property. They do not steal. Many people feel great anger or intense hatred at some time in their lives. They do not kill.”
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
[NPR]
Qjersey
Ironic that oobleck looks like jizz
justiceontherocks
The desire to buy that shirt is clearly one he should have suppressed.
Vinnie
He just hasn’t been the same since he broke up with Rachel.
greenmanTN
So someone with an arrogant intellectual blind-spot in one area has an arrogant intellectual blind-spot in another? Quel surprise. It takes incredible arrogance for someone like Katz to believe that despite homosexuality’s existence in most mammals and every known human civilization that his “take” on it matters a damn, is even worth listening to. His arrogance is repeated in his failing to see that the very quality of cornstarch that makes it a possible fix, it becomes solid under pressure, is the same quality (you have to deliver it quickly UNDER PRESSURE) that most likely makes it unworkable.
And it’s not gays’ fault this arrogant, hatchet-faced asshole with a gigantic nose can’t get laid.
Tommy Marx
“What of those cursed with unnatural sexual desires? Must they forever suppress these desires? Yes.”
This is the biggest problem I have with Christians.
1. If you believe having sex with another man is immoral, then don’t have sex with another man. But it is just as immoral to legalize a belief and force everyone else to live by your specific mythology. When people can be fired, lose their apartments, be bullied in school and at work, and can’t even get married because some people think they are icky, that is the definition of discrimination, not religious freedom.
2. Jesus does not once mention or condemn homosexuality or premarital sex.
3. Christians have no problem legalizing discrimination against gays, yet they don’t criminalize premarital sex, divorce, or adultery. Newt Gingrich has had multiple wives and is a serial adulterer, yet conveniently his god “forgives him” for past transgressions. Christians only seek to demonize gays.
4. Having sex with another man is nothing like cheating on a spouse. Gay sex hurts no one, whereas adultery often is extremely hurtful to the one being cheated on.
5. I agree. Ever since Rachel left him, he’s gone to hell in a basket of cornstarch.
zaniell
Not hard to hell how he grew to be homophobic lol. He’s an effeminate boy who’s been hit on a lot by masculine dudes when he was younger so he solved this “issue” by turning against all gays….
zaniell
This kind of hatred from effeminate looking guys usually stems from being molested at younger age…
Kieran
He could have solved the Gulf Spill by using that nose to inhale the oil.
Shannon
NO ONE WANTS THIS BIG NOSED…WEAK CHINNED….GROSS LOOKING GEEK…HELL NO WOMAN WANTS HIM..
j
He’s cute! But evil.
Tommy Marx
Now I’m sad I read this. I was curious and read Katz’s “In Defense of Homophobia” in its entirety. His main argument against gays – specifically gay men – is that as a result of our actions, we brought HIV and AIDS into America and ended up killing a lot of innocent people. Not the gay men who died from AIDS, of course, but the innocent children and heterosexuals that contracted HIV because our promiscuity killed them.
What a disgusting excuse for a professor.
zaniell
He looks like an altar boy tho… his son came out as gay, right? All the gay porn on his dad’s computer is probbly to blame
Jeffree
The reason his idea to fix the spill was rejected was because it was untested and unworkable. His belief in his own system probably made him unwilling to look at other ideas objectively, so he became a sad troll flogging his ideas which no one would listen to.
Not too convincing when all he had were “rough estimates.”
And yet another case of a straight man obsessing about teh gheys having us some sex. We all know what *that* means.
WillBFair
@Tommy Marx: This is the biggest problem I have with bigotted queers. They can’t tell the difference between christians and fundamnetalists, and they don’t mind alienating some of our greatest allies.
Bostonian
Zaniell : Uh, I don’t think anyone named Katz was ever an altar boy.
Bostonian
But I also know the majority of Jews don’t share his intense homophobia.
JonJon
The tiny numbers of sympatheic Christians is not really worth our time. Religion is a mental disease and it is also child abuse. Fuck ’em. Religious queers are the worst.
McMike
Isn’t he gay?
btw, I guess this guy doesn’t have a clue to who Karma is but I’m pretty sure she’s friends with a lot of Nazi skinheads.
Bostonian
McMike : I know in life we sometimes see “strange bedfellows”, but a Jewish scientist hanging out with Nazi skinheads is pushing the idea a bit too far.
imperator
Aww, hey there Jonny, why the long face?
No one takes you seriously and they all call you a stupid fucktard?
Well… can’t help you there, the jury has spoken.
Dan Sydnes
If a rheopectic or dilatantic fluid was used at Macondo Prospect, it might have slowed the oil spill but not plugged it.
Regardless, the four authors of the proposal never addressed some serious roadblocks:
1) What fluid would be used? Oobleck (a dilatantic fluid made of corn starch and water) would have frozen solid due to mixing with methane hydrate — a similar problem that prevented the containment dome from working.
2) How would this novel fluid be produced in massive quantities necessary for this project?
3) How would it be delivered? The same properties that would slow the flow of oil & methane (dynamic viscosity, resistance to strain & shear) also create substantial challenges to piping it to the sea floor and into the well head. Ideally this fluid would be created from its components on-site, which is a significant engineering problem.
Tommy Marx
@WillBFair: With all due respect, Will, Christians believe in unicorns (Numbers 23:22, 24:8; Deuteronomy 33:17; Job 39:9, 10; Psalms 22:21, 29:6, 92:10; Isaiah 34:7), dragons (Deuteronomy 32:33; Nehemiah: 2:13; Job 30:29; Psalms 44:19, 74:13, 91:13, 148:7; Isaiah 13:22, 27:1, 34:13, 35:7, 43:20, 51:9; Jeremiah 9:11, 10:22, 14:6, 49:33, 51:34, 37; Ezekiel 29:3; Micah: 1:8; Malachi 1:3; Revelations 12:3, 4, 7, 9, 13, 16, 17; 13:2, 4, 11, 16:13, 20:2), satyrs (Isaiah 13:21, 34:14), and talking animals (Genesis 3:1, 4, 5; Numbers 22:28, 30).
Forgive me if I have a little trouble accepting anything they say at face value.
Also, please explain how anything I stated was incorrect? Or insulting in any way? Did I misrepresent Christians? Should I have mentioned that giants appear in the King James Bible nineteen times and wizards appear ten times, but there are zero references to homosexuals, abortion, traditional, or values?
If I am a bigot, please explain to me what I wrote that led you to assign me that particular label?
Thanks! 🙂
Montrealll
How did Christianity even come up in THIS article about a Jewish, and probably agnostic, professor of science?? It’s about as irrelevant as Islam here.
Geoff
Physics professor, evolutionary biology know-nothing.
Well his objections to gays are morally, scientifically, logically f&^%ing stupid.
And of course I’m sure, much like the bible, he is fine with incest and slavery.
B
No. 22 · Tommy Marx wrote, “Did I misrepresent Christians?”
… well, you did misrepresent a lot of them. What you described are the fundamentalist (snake handlers, Biblical literalists, etc.) The more liberal Christians don’t take the Bible literally, treating a lot of it as a mix of history, literature, and an evolving attempt to understand “spirituality”.
On an individual basis, you have the people who really believe everything they hear or read, but you also have the business executives who get dragged to church by their wives, profess a belief in God Sunday mornings and when necessary to keep peace in the family, and then spend the rest of their lives robbing the poor for the benefit of the rich.
William
@greenmanTN: AMEN
Tommy Marx
@Montrealll: “My father is a physics professor at Washington University. Years ago, he wrote an article on his personal website in which he justified homophobia as a “moral judgment” about a person’s actions. Even if one does not accept Judeo-Christian morality, he wrote, gays should be shunned because they are physically and morally responsible for the AIDS epidemic.” Isaac Katz, the son of Jonathan.
Tommy Marx
@B: Fair enough. I should have said “some Christians” instead.
Montrealll
Thanks, Tommy. But I also agree that most Jews are not anti-gay. And I also think the comments on here on his looks and his nose are getting rather anti-Semitic (no, I’m not Jewish myself).
YetAgain
Katz probably would have preferred to live in one of those Communist atheist governments that sent gays to Siberia for Crimes Against the State.
Jim Hlavac
@Tommy Marx: Now that is some Bible research!
Though I do like First Samuel, chapters 18-22 inclusive, which do tell the wonderful gay love story of Jonathan & David. Earlier on in 1 Sam, David is described as nothing short of a sissy whom everyone laughs at. He slays Goliath (An allegory of gays defeating straights, I think, but I’m weird some times.) Anyway, David goes to the desert, pitches a tent, and the next day Jonathan shows up and “ungirds himself and throws down his sword and naked did enter the tent of David. And they knew each other three days and three nights. And the shepherd boy left food at the flap of the tent and it was consumed but he saw them not.”
I do not believe they were playing pinochle. I think they was smooching!
YetAgain
Jim Hlavac : To fully appreciate that, let’s hope the curley-headed Hebrew David looked more like Michelangelo’s version and not like Dustin “Screech” Diamond.
ithinktoomuch
The gay issue is not the only thing that’s wrong with Katz. He’s also a climate change apologist who thinks climate change, if real, isn’t primarily human-caused and in the end will actually result in a planet that is more favorable to humanity.
Also, he’s anti affirmative action and calls out people who engage in it bigots because they are choosing their friends based on race. Friends?? What’s weird about this argument is that it makes him sound like he thinks everyone in the world gets their employment solely based on nepotism.
Dude’s a whackadoodle.
YetAgain
ITHINKTOOMUCH : Most college professors are whackadoodles, but usually not the ones in the hard sciences like Math and Physics ! Usually it’s the Sociology and Philosophy profs who are the loons. Katz seems to be an exception.
B
No. 27 · Tommy Marx wrote, “@B: Fair enough. I should have said “some Christians” instead.”
Thanks – I should also point out that the most vocal ones seem to be the “fire and brimstone” fundamentalists. The reasonable ones don’t let religion dominate their lives, which means they aren’t going to waste time arguing with a bunch of people so crazy (in the figurative sense of the word) that it borders on insanity. So the crazies end up being the ones with the microphone and the highest-power amplifier.
Did hear a funny story about some fundamentalists once – seems in some backward part of the south (West Virginia?) a group of them decided the world was going to end in a month, so they quit their jobs, drained all their financial resources, etc. Others in the town thought they were crazy. One said, “No one knows when the world is going to end. It might not be for another 6 months!”
John
I know where I’d like to put some of that “oobleck”…
Cam
@B: said..
”
No. 22 · Tommy Marx wrote, “Did I misrepresent Christians?”
… well, you did misrepresent a lot of them. What you described are the fundamentalist (snake handlers, Biblical literalists, etc.) The more liberal Christians don’t take the Bible literally, treating a lot of it as a mix of history, literature, and an evolving attempt to understand “spirituality”.”
_________________________________
So then, is every single GOP Congressperson a snake handler?
McMike
@Bostonian: Um, I was referring to the Nazi skinheads being proud of their Nazi background.
McMike
@Jim Hlavac: The hottest, most passionate love story in the Bible is between David & Jonathan. Funny how Fundies blow off this fact.
McMike
@Cam: The problem with the Bible is it’s constantly being “translated” with many passages altered by the men and their agendas. For example, the clobber passage in Corinthians was condemning masturbation less than a hundred years ago. Thankfully we live in the Info Age and can figure out the original text of the Bible does NOT condemn homosexuality as the current text does today.
Adam Kadmon
It’s been a while (20 years?) since I read it, but John Boswell’s “Christianity, Homosexuality, and Social Tolerance” went into great detail about the translation issues with the Bible. I could only manage so much interest in the topic because as an atheist it was academic not personal. The thing I remember most clearly is that the same word translated as “abomination” in Leviticus regarding homosexuality is used throughout the Bible and is translated as “unclean” (for the purposes of religious ritual) elsewhere.
And it is odd that Fundamentalists and Biblical Literalists can single out this or that passage condemning homosexuality yet ignore the story of David and Jonathon (or Ruth and Naomi). It takes some pretty fancy footwork and artful “spin” to deny the obvious, David and Jonathon were in love with each other, that love was physical as well as spiritual, and they weren’t condemned for it.
What really seems to piss off Christians even more than atheism is an argument I intended to be LESS offensive to them, that it doesn’t really matter whether or not there is a God.
A. Impossible to prove there is a God, but even assuming that some all-powerful creator lit the fuse on the Big Bang or bibbety-bobbety-booed reality into being, it doesn’t follow that the Bible or any other “holy” book tells a single accurate thing about that Being.
B. The Bible doesn’t start off with “Dear diary,” it was written by men and is therefore flawed.
C. The mind and intent of such a omnipotent creator is unknowable and to think you do know is arrogance, so we don’t really know what He wants.
D. Whether or not there is a God, no one will know how well they did until they die and get their “report card.”
E. In the absence of accurate information the only thing one can do is be a good person and treat His other creations well.
F. Being a good person and treating the Earth and others well is required anyway for civilized society to function, even in the absence of God.
G. Ergo, it doesn’t really matter whether or not there is a God.
But what I’ve learned is that people are far more attached to their holy books than they are to the factual existence of God. It’s THAT god, in THAT book, or nothing. They NEED that rule book as a hedge against the unknown in order to cope. Rather than admit that some parts of the Bible like the stories of Adam & Eve or Noah’s Ark are myths or fables, which opens up the whole thing to question, they will instead insist it’s ALL literally true even though it flies in the face of reason. The Fundamentalism we’re seeing is in direct response to science and knowledge making it all seem less likely. Hopefully it’s just a passing phase but it’s going to be rough.
Paul F
#36 Cam. No, not every congress critter is a snake handler, but most of them ARE snakes!
Eric Holder
I wonder if this Jonathan Katz knows about this Jonathan Katz:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_David_Katz