Dear Science,
We here at misinformer.com have all been long time fans of yours. Without science there wouldn't be hydroponic lettuce, Star Trek, or those dot pictures that turn 3-D when you stare at them.
We would, however, like to inform your dumb asses that you are making a big, BIG mistake with this diabolical carnivorous "gastrobot" as you call it. You say yourself in the article, "The ideal fuel, in terms of energy gain, is meat."
What the hell, Science? Have you invented a new kind of supercrack that you're smoking? As Jeff Lynn Goldblum once said, "You're so preoccupied with whether or not you could that you didn't stop to think if you should." The times that I agree with Jeff Goldblum are extremely few and far between, so you had better heed the crap out of my warning.
Do you remember Deep Blue Sea? I told you five minutes into that movie that making super-intelligent giant sharks was a bad idea, but you went and did it anyway. You know what? Now you're all dead.
Remember Terminator? A dark future where robots become self-aware, rebel, and take over the planet. Remember that? You know what? Those robots DIDN'T EVEN EAT MEAT and they stomped mankind into a greasy pink stain on history just because they FELT LIKE IT! Can you imagine if they actually needed to EAT US for FUEL?
Yes, that's right, Science. Eat us. As my vegetarian girlfriend points out, it takes eight times the amount of corn to feed two fat guys at Tony Roma's ONE TIME through a cow than it would to feed 10 fat guys for a MONTH just feeding them corn. Or something like that. I get confused when she starts talking about math.
Anyway, my point is, by the time you perfect the flesh eating robot, you know how many cows are going to be left? Two. You feed the two cows to the flesh eating robot, and it uses their endangered asses to power up its mighty electronic brain just long enough to go, "No cows, huh. I'll be damned. I guess I'll have to eat all the humans then."
What is the practical application of a flesh eating robot? Huh, smarty? This article actually contains the quote, "If a robot fish could be built then it would make more sense to build a robot which ate fish and monitored beaches for sharks."
Sounds reasonable enough. If you're going to build a robot fish, why not have it eat other fish? That makes sense. Oh wait, WHO THE HELL NEEDS A ROBOT FISH?! That's like saying, "If a robot squirrel could be built, then it would make more sense to build a robot squirrel that ate real squirrels and monitored trees for cougars."
How many years did you spend working on this project before you realized 10 minutes before the press conference that you had absolutely no reasonable idea what it could be used for? Why not suggest a precinct made up of super robot cops that capture criminals and then eat them?
Now I'm no scientist, but here's a little tip: why not try to make a robot that runs on something that you're NOT MADE OF? Better yet, something that you can't get rid of! Remember Back to the Future II? Remember Mr. Fusion? Make a robot that runs on skanky beer and banana peels! Better yet, make a robot that eats shit and turns it back into food! Wait, you already invented that, it's called a cornfield.
Cut it out. You've been warned.
Marcus Alexander Hart
Editor in Chief
|
