Flying the Dog Friendly Skies!

Listen up good, peons!  Fido's right to fly exceeds yours!  Suck it, proles!

A woman was dragged off a Los Angeles-bound Southwest Airlines flight Tuesday after telling crew members she had a life-threatening pet allergy. There were two dogs aboard.
“Everything was very quiet up until a decision was made that this woman would have to be physically removed from the plane,” said Bill Dumas, who provided video of the incident to KTLA. “She just put up a lot of resistance and was adamant about not being taken off the plane.”
In a statement, Southwest said... any passenger without a medical certificate may be denied boarding if he or she reports a life-threatening allergic reaction and cannot travel safely with an animal on board. The passenger was unable to provide a medical certificate, the airline stated.

Get your ass off that plane, you two legged hooligan!   How dare you be allergic to DOG!

Here is the video:

Flying just keeps becoming more and more ridiculous.  Perhaps soon, humans won't be allowed to fly at all?  

The comments on YouTube are absolutely priceless.  Consider such priceless gems such as "stop acting like a privileged bitch! follow the instructions and get your ass off the plane. why does everyone think they're entitled to some special treatment these days?"   I suppose that is due to the fact that some people cling to the antiquated notion that human rights exceed dog rights?  What right does someone have to bring a dog on to a plane, anyway?  Oh, I'm sure it was some sort of "comfort animal" (i.e. pet) the dog worshipper could not do without. 

Have a great evening, everybody!

Blog Update

Run for your lives!  Its MickZilla!

Blog update.  Haven't written much recently - my attention has been primarily on other matters.  Animal Uncontrol may become dormant, but never dead.  Some bloggers do a "grand exit":   Farewell world!  I am sailing off into the sunset forever!   Yeah, right, until they again desire to become the center of attention.

The dogocracy / animal supremacy is a rather arcane social issue.  I started this Animal Uncontrol "Project" about 5 years ago when I realized that almost no critical thought or analysis had been applied to said social issue.  At this point, however, I feel like most of the issues have been covered, and unlike a lot of bloggers/writers, I prefer not to repeat myself too often. 

Blog statistics show the blog still gets about 150-200 unique visitors a day (~5,500 per month) MOSTLY this one.   Problems with barking, anyone?

I have ideas for a few essays that include but are not limited to:
- Lawsuits.
- Invasive species, particularly snakes taking over the Everglades.
- Gun P0rn.  (Never gets old).
- More outrageous Mickey memes such as the one depicted above. 

Speaking of lawsuits, long time commenter Eileen is preparing to sue her bark-crazed neighbors.  I hope Eileen keeps us up to date on the progress of that. 

I am also considering changing the blog format:  I'd like to categorize all of the articles, i.e. "Pit Bulls", "Barking", "Humor", etc... I plan to get moving on that in the near future. 

Like many blogs, the comments section attached to each article is often pure gold, so anyone with anything interesting to say is welcome to comment on any article. 

Have a great weekend!
  

Null Hypothesis

Convinced that there is no causal relationship between 2 events?  Firm believer in "innocent until proven guilty"?  That is the Null Hypothesis. 

The Null Hypothesis makes sense when applied... well, sensibly.  While correlation is a necessary prerequisite for causation, correlation does not necessarily indicate causation.

From Wiki:

For any two correlated events, A and B, the different possible relationships include:

• A causes B (direct causation);
• B causes A (reverse causation);
• A and B are consequences of a common cause, but do not cause each other;
• A and B both causes C, which is (explicitly or implicitly) conditioned on.;
• A causes B and B causes A (bidirectional or cyclic causation);
• A causes C which causes B (indirect causation);
• There is no connection between A and B; the correlation is a coincidence.

The last bullet item would indicate a Null Hypothesis:  No causal relationship.

Moving along...

'Twas another pit bull mauling in OK a few days ago.  An elderly woman walking her dog was killed by 2 at-large pit bulls.  Her head was nearly removed from her body. 

Of course, those coming to the defense of those dogs, and those like them, insist that the breed background of the mutt perpetrators had nothing to do with it.  Indeed, it was just something that happened.  Like having it rain on your birthday.   The fact that the dogs involved had the capacity to decapitate somebody was merely a coincidence.   Hey, she could had her head cut off by a goldfish, right?

Remember, according to dog worshippers and pit bull fanatics, the facts that pit bulls were bred to fight, and have the overall physical capacity to take down a grown man have nothing to do with any of this carnage.  To them, horrific events of this sort are strictly a coincidence.  Remember, its not pit bulls that kill, or even dogs.  Hell its not even mammals, or anything alive!   The victim in question could have died of anything, and the fact that this death involved game bred fight dogs with a bite strength of an industrial hydraulic press was strictly a coincidence.  The physical capacity and breed history of pit bulls to fight to the death is not implicated in any way, ever.  This is the Null Hypothesis of almost every dog mauling.   

Dog apologists and pit bull fanatics always try to act and sound smart.  I consider most of them to be a "95 IQ genius'" at best.  If you are on a forum and need a retort, try this: "You are abusing the Null Hypothesis".   I dunno if that IS smart, but it sure SOUNDS smart, doesn't it?

Have a great week!