Althouse: "It’s like God was like, 'Well, I think I overdid it with the ants.'"

January 3, 2014

"It’s like God was like, 'Well, I think I overdid it with the ants.'"

"And then had the idea to send some insane, bulky creature down to take care of them. And that’s me. And the thing is, I love it!"

12 comments:

Guildofcannonballs said...: This makes me feel stupid and discriminated against.

I do not believe anteaters are bulky nor insane.

How can someone claim this while trying to entertain? Doesn't the incongruity or lack of semblance to Nature's God not distract and abruptly halt any humor?

I know the answer; it's the old Costanza "it's me not you" only you is everyone else.; 1/3/14, 8:02 PM
CWJ said...: Love it!

Good to have a purpose, know it & love what you do.; 1/3/14, 8:03 PM
Guildofcannonballs said...: I looked at some synonyms and bulky is not the correct word for comedy.

How about varmintly or marmintly?

And insane is insanely wrong.

How about turd-like instead?; 1/3/14, 8:07 PM
Ambrose said...: I wonder who evolved first - the ants or the anteaters?; 1/3/14, 8:32 PM
Michael K said...: Silly article.; 1/3/14, 8:50 PM
Tyrone Slothrop said...: I have been an Anteater, at the University of California at Irvine. Zot!; 1/3/14, 11:21 PM
F said...: No one does pretentious quite like the New Yorker.; 1/3/14, 11:29 PM
rhhardin said...: It's an eatanter.

Determined by an old BC cartoon, on what to name the animals.

Go by what it does.; 1/4/14, 5:30 AM
Ann Althouse said...: Silly and pretentious… that's not easy.

I thought it was funny.; 1/4/14, 5:44 AM
Roger Sweeny said...: "I’m gonna eat so many ants, you would think it’s what I’ve been put on Earth to do, just Hoover up ants like the weirdest thing in the world."

I suspect this is how a majority of Americans (and people all over the world) think.

Of course, creationists think this way, and lots of people who consider themselves scientific mock them for it. But many of those same people see evolution as some benevolent process directed at an end, namely today's beautifully and fragilely "balanced" nature. Where everything fits together and has a purpose--and which should then not be "disturbed."

But science says there is no direction--aside from increased complexity at one tail. There is no "telos," no desired end. There is a balance but it is an imperfect and constantly changing one, with one day's--or one's eon's--balance no better or worse than another's. The only constant is change.; 1/4/14, 8:19 AM
Jim said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 1/4/14, 2:19 PM
Jim said...: So, now we have a jaguar problem...
(Joke starts at 2:05)
Red Eye; 1/4/14, 2:22 PM