Dexter Dexter Dexter

I'm a huge fan of Dexter. It is actually the one show me and the wife watch together. She was stubborn and didn't watch the first two seasons but one day I forced it on her. She has been hooked ever since.

Lately there haven't been many shows on TV that I actually look forward to each week. I didn't think anything would replace Sopranos for me. But Dexter does the trick.

I used to be a much easier sell when it came to looking forward to TV shows each week. In the early 70's I used to look forward to watching The Partridge Family. And then there was Fernwood Tonight when I was in high school. I had to watch it.

OK, now about Dexter (PLEASE NOTE: SPOILER ALERT SPOILER ALERT).

I think, I don't know, I think that the show has a fairly intelligent following. You know, people like me who think about all kinds of outcomes and scenarios. The writing has been very good. Sure, I've spotted some holes before, but they didn't bug me that much.

But I even blurted out to my wife three shows ago that the writing is starting to get a bit lazy. It started when Dexter returned the kidnapped boy. I'm thinking, in what state did Dexter return the boy. Was he still conked out? If he was did Dexter leave him on a porch or something? C'mon writers WTF. Obviously the kid wasn't awake or he would be able to describe Dexter to the police.

OK, so now we get to the second last episode of season 4. Dexter allows himself to be followed. Yeah, I know that Dexter's character has become more careless, but he had to think he was being set up when he got a call from Arthur from an arcade and there was no sign of Arthur. There were only two options. Arthur just kidnapped another boy or he was being set up. He had to assume that Arthur got his victim, and that would have motivated him to forget his sister's immediate need for someone to talk to and save the child once more.

I had this other thought after the second last episode. Because Dexter's family had become so important to him, why wasn't he just letting the police solve the Trinity killing, now that he knew that Arthur could point out new victims (the 10 year old children that were buried alive under asphalt). Surely, Dexter could now emphasize with the parents and family of missing children. At that point, if Dexter killed Arthur, the burial grounds of all those kids would die with him.

Now we get to the season finale. I had to watch it again, just to make sure that the holes I felt were real holes. There were way too many.

First off, Dexter and Arthur make a deal to leave one another alone. There is every indication that Arthur would have lived up to the deal. But things change when Dexter goes immediately after him, only to leave Arthur knocked out in his car when things go bad and Dexter winds up in jail.

Dexter is in jail, he doesn't know how long Arthur will be out for, and he knows Arthur is a serial killer who knows his identity. At this point he should be calling Rita (his wife) to get the kids and her butt out of the house.

Anyway, that didn't happen, and Dexter goes back to the scene where he left Arthur unconscious.

Arthur abandons his van? Why?

Next, we see Arthur break into Dexter's home? Dexter knew Arthur might have guessed that Dexter knocked him out by now. What time did Arthur break in? Where was everybody? And better yet, what mode of transportation did Arthur use to get to the house? He didn't pick up his convertible until after he broke into the house and he left the other vehicle in an underground parking lot.

What's next? The cops interview the boy that was kidnapped? Why wasn't the kid grilled after he was kidnapped period? And why didn't he mention the fact that Arthur kept calling him Arthur?

Now we get to Arthur's capture. Why wasn't there a police manhunt for Arthur's vehicles? His family knew he still had the convertible. Why assume he flew away? And how did Arthur deal with that convertible? We saw him throw Arthur's cut up remains in the bay, but what did he do with the car? You can't just leave a killer's car out on the side of the highway.

Now we come to Rita's death. It had to happen during the day. By fluke, Rita came back to the house, we know that. But again, the continuation of the show makes it appear that Arthur went on to disappearance as soon as he picked up the convertible from the body shop. So what mode of transportation did Arthur use when he went to Dexter's house the second time when the murder was committed? And why would Arthur kill Rita in front of the baby? It was totally against his pattern. And Arthur had no way of knowing that Dexter went through a similar circumstance.

Lazy sloppy writing. And many clues regarding Season 5:

When Arthur came to station where Dexter works, Batista (a detective) had to notice Arthur's face. Is that going to be part of next year's plot?

Before Dexter knocks down Quinn, he says he is investigating the Kyle Butler case. Again, Quinn is a detective. Arthur's family knows Dexter as Kyle Butler, and there is no reason why the FBI will give up looking for Arthur, so the family will still remain as witnesses.

Is Dexter going to be the main suspect in his wife's murder? He has a history of hitting the neighbor who kissed Rita. He won't have a good alibi for where is was when she died. Or an excuse for why he didn't leave with her. The fact that there were no missing boys five days ahead of time, will take Arthur off the hook. And Deborah knows how messed up Dexter might really be by now, knowing his history.

Plus it will also come out, if I'm right, that Dexter was arrested for violent behavior, right at a place where Arthur's truck was left.

And when Dexter's picture appears in the paper, Arthur's family is bound to recognize him and go to the cops.

Too many potential holes still for next year. I doubt they are will get resolved. And I know it shouldn't bug me, but it does. It bugs me more than knowing that in the Simpson's it is impossible for Springfield to be in any one particular state. That is how much it bugs me.

Those Pesky Global Warming Emails Explained

Potholer54 does an excellent job informing the non willfully ignorant on the so called damning emails that the media and especially the Religious Right (in disguise) has jumped on as evidence that Global Warming is a scam:



Lots of fuss, over next to nothing. And all these people screaming scam, don't even understand what it is they are screaming about.

From another source: "You can't tell what they are talking about. Scientists say 'trick' not just to mean deception. They mean it as a clever way of doing something - a short cut can be a trick."

For those who really want to know about Climate Change, Potholer54 has a playlist of reasonably short videos which explains it all in non biased layman's terms.

Why Global Warming Denialists Exist

Lets forget about the big business reasons to deny Global Warming caused by man for a moment.

One thing that doesn't seem to get a lot of attention is that most Global Warming denialists are also evolution denialists. Yes, the connection has been made, but there hasn't been lots said, and motivations aren't really being looked at.

I'm going to hypothesize about the reasons.

Bible literalists love any sort of perceived ambiguity in science (even if it doesn't really exist). Why? Because they are brainwashed thinking that if anything in their bible is wrong, the whole bible is wrong. So the fact that scientists have not come up with a consensus on Global Warming, and some believe that it is mostly man made, while others believe it is mostly a natural climate change, while others think that it is a mixture of the two, and aren't sure about the magnitude of man made causes regarding the current heating of the climate.

It is the same tactic used by creationists who quote Gould regarding his hypothesis regarding evolution happening abruptly. The fact that there were and still are debates regarding this, makes creationists state that the jury is out on evolution.

Of course, the data shows the earth is heating up and that evolution happened. But because the EXACT mechanisms are figured out yet, gives creationists the ability to say that evolution and Global Warming is not real science.

Another reason could be that creationists don't think that there is such a thing as climate change, well, except when God makes it rain for 40 straight days. 45% of Americans believe the earth is less than 10,000 years old. So using logic, most of them don't believe there have been Ice Ages, since the last one started around 20,000 years ago, at least 10,000 years before God created everything.

Personally, I don't think that these people really think about such things as the real age of the earth. The majority just drool at the mouth when they perceive they have any chance that there is a science conspiracy.

More Strong Evidence For Evolution That A Creationist Could Accept

If you are a creationist, please try to follow this video. It shows how molecular biology confirms evolution:

Buckingham Palace Will Become A Mosque

And the Queen will have a choice, become Muslim or leave (maybe die, but I guess they interviewed a moderate Muslim):


These people are bat shit crazy. But they are a dangerous kind of crazy.

I just needed to post the video.

Can you imagine Jews saying that Buckingham Palace will become a synagogue? Of course not. Jews don't proselytize for one thing. There is no goal for Jews to be a majority except out of necessity in Israel right now.

Besides, according to Jew haters, Jews only need to be around 1% of the population to control everything from government policy to the weather.

Another interesting tidbit I came across. Did you know that since the creation of Israel in 1948 over 11 million Muslims have died violent deaths. And over 35,000 deaths happened in and around the disputed territories in Israel. Only around 10 million of those Muslim deaths were at the hand of other Muslims.

All the Jooo paranoid imbeciles who like to blame radical Islam on Israel really need to read more.