Friday, February 23, 2007


Okay, I agree. A review of the research on finger length ratios' relation to orientation, that ultimately goes only to show how some popular research goes nowhere…

What was I thinking?! :-)

It’s for times like these that I keep something up my sleeve.

How about a pallet cleanser?

It’s a duck.

Or so I’m told. By A.

Anyway, hope you all have a good weekend. :-D


Kengo Biddles said...

Well, obviously. The blue squiggles underneath is the water, the blue oblongs with yellow lines in the center are wings, and it's only apparent to any art-critic such as myself ( ;) ) that this is a duck taking off from a pond. Quite the talent.

You should frame it and sell it when he becomes the next Worhol, or whatever. ;)

Nice choice for an interlude.

-L- said...

I was just biding my time until there were several entries with the label 2D:4D before I commented. You know how it is with jumping to conclusions early.


Scot said...

Kengo: I’m sorry. I can see what you’re getting at but I have to say absolutely no. You cannot buy this 100% original work of art. Besides, it already has a thumbtack hole through it.

Now, if you want to commission a work, the artist accepts cashier’s check, visa, and/or small plastic dinosaurs in payment.

L: You laugh, but just you wait, mister. I predict within the year another, larger study will come out, getting folks to again measure their fingers, finally putting this great controversy to rest, and allowing use of the label once more.

Kengo Biddles said...

Consider a stegosaurus on its way, right now. ;) (Thanks for the laugh!)