SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY OF THE WEEK SO FAR
(Thanks to MissV)
Post a comment
Your Information
(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)
« Previous | Main | Next »
November 20, 2009
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Verify your Comment
Previewing your Comment
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
"the heat of a woman's vagina" would be a good name for a .....
would be a good name....
would be good.
Posted by: Pannus | November 20, 2009 at 09:03 AM
"vulnerably drooping gonads" gnfarb
Posted by: russellmc | November 20, 2009 at 09:08 AM
"ostentatious scrotal baggage" would NOT
Posted by: russellmc | November 20, 2009 at 09:09 AM
best sentence ever written in a scientific paper
"Anything deviating from this--particularly a set of unusually pendulous testicles suspended in knee-length scrota--is probably more likely to have a woman dry-heaving, screaming, or staring in confusion than serving as an aphrodisiac. "
Posted by: russellmc | November 20, 2009 at 09:10 AM
foreign sperm-removal device WBAGNF Sienna Miller.
What?
Posted by: Jeff Meyerson | November 20, 2009 at 09:17 AM
Extraordinarily Sensitive Sperm also WBAGNFARB, as would be The Continually Orbiting Testicles (also a great name for a sci-fi movie).
Posted by: jon | November 20, 2009 at 09:30 AM
I'm not going to read all that. Had to stop at, "evolved as a sort of ornamental display". 'Nuf said. Paint 'em green and let 'em free.
Posted by: Loudmouth | November 20, 2009 at 09:39 AM
well, guess tighty whitees wont promote freedom.... but i guess this was everything you wanted to know abt balls but didnt feel like asking a stupid question....
Posted by: queensbee | November 20, 2009 at 09:48 AM
do your balls hang low?
can you wave them to and fro?
can you tie them in a knot,or
into a little bow?
then you are risking damage and according to some scientists' hypothesis your genes will almost certainly not be passed on to the next generation owing to the high probabilities of mishap, and the low probabilities of finding a mate!
do your balls hang low?
Posted by: insomniac | November 20, 2009 at 09:48 AM
Didn't Unusually Pendulous Testicles open for the Dead Kenendys in '82?
Posted by: wiredog | November 20, 2009 at 10:01 AM
At least you've got to admire the guy for finding a way to get paid for his life's obsession.
Posted by: NotSherly | November 20, 2009 at 10:31 AM
Russellmc: Exactly. You beat me to it.
One of the best articles I've read in a long time. Thoroughly informative and entertaining.
Thanks, MissV!
Posted by: bonmot | November 20, 2009 at 10:33 AM
I'm siding with Loud, "ornamental display" gets my vote!
Hey, imagine taking that route the next time you're in a bar?
"Hey babe, what ya think of these?" *zip*
Posted by: kibby F5 | November 20, 2009 at 10:39 AM
Ain't that a kick in the nuts.
Posted by: bonmot | November 20, 2009 at 10:52 AM
any male in the ancestral past that ... enjoyed testicular insult
"Your 'nads are ugly and you dress them funny."
"Ooh, honey! Say it again!"
Posted by: The Dread Pirate Chris | November 20, 2009 at 11:41 AM
This is what happens when you ask a scientist, "How they hangin'?"
It's kinda like asking your grandmother about her health. Expect to be overanswered.
Posted by: padraig | November 20, 2009 at 12:20 PM
Why do human testicles hang down like that? Target practice. Enough said.
Posted by: nursecindy | November 20, 2009 at 12:26 PM
Makes 'em easier to scratch.
Posted by: Wolfsong | November 20, 2009 at 12:54 PM
Looking forward to the 10 page dissertatiion on shrinkage.
Posted by: MartiniShark | November 20, 2009 at 01:14 PM
I'm an Agnostic but even I know they hang that way because God has a sense of humor.
Posted by: Steve | November 20, 2009 at 01:46 PM
and having the Siemen's auditory podcast promo was a particularly poignant bit of affinity advertising.
Posted by: Cheesewiz | November 20, 2009 at 01:47 PM
Cindy, scarily enough, that was actually their first hypothesis.
Posted by: Elon | November 20, 2009 at 02:29 PM
Okay, boffins, explain the dogleg . . .
Posted by: bonmot | November 20, 2009 at 03:28 PM
I can't believe the scientist had the balls to write that article.
Posted by: Georg | November 20, 2009 at 03:42 PM
That still doesn't explain this. (NSFW!)
Posted by: Ralph | November 20, 2009 at 04:52 PM
There's no explainin' that, Ralph ... absolutely no way ...
Key quote:
" ... peculiarly shaped ... "
Are you talkin' to ME?
Are YOU talkin' to ME??!?!?!?!
... on second thot ... um ... nevermind ...
Posted by: O the U(manity) | November 20, 2009 at 10:17 PM
The next obvious question is: "Why do men have nipples?"
Posted by: Phill McAvity | November 21, 2009 at 10:08 AM
" After graduating from Faber College, Flounder went on to graduate school to do important scientific research... "
Posted by: Clankazoid | November 21, 2009 at 11:03 AM
The real question is: why do pants manufacturers put the zipper so close to them?
Posted by: Meanie the Blue | November 21, 2009 at 02:26 PM
Phil, you asked, “Why do men have nipples?” Here goes. Men have nipples because their mother had them. They need them because their daughters need them. People inherit half of their genes from each of their parents. If men did not have nipples, then some of their daughters would not them either. If this had actually happened, their babies would have starved and that branch of humanity would not be around today. Therefore, nipple-less men are very rare.
Posted by: Execute | November 21, 2009 at 02:40 PM
Why am I signed in as Execute. I did not use this name. I am usually Ken in SC.
Posted by: Execute | November 21, 2009 at 02:44 PM