If you know your organic chemistry (or would like to know your organic chemistry), you should click on this link to see organic chemistry explained through the base unit of Internet expression: the cat.

(Painting created on an iPad, by Don Shank.)

Fox News is, at times, painfully funny in its ignorance. For instance, Bill O’Reilly is apparently unaware that tides are caused by the moon, and insists that it cannot be explained.

The BMJ, last week, accused Andrew Wakefield of fraud. Here at the Big Bad Blog, we have seen a number of comments of the “about time” sort — almost dismissing the fraud as old news. However, given libel law in the UK, here at the Big Bad Blog, we feel that this is huge. Fraud is a deliberate act, purposely misleading others for material gain.

It seemed (to somebody without detailed knowledge of the particulars) perfectly plausible that Wakefield was just a poor researcher who designed his experiment to confirm his pre-established conclusions, and the sort of person who cannot admit that they are wrong. That the BMJ feels confident that his work was malicious and not well-intentioned (though misleading and of poor quality) is certainly newsworthy.

Back in April, the website ThinkGeek created an April Fool’s Day joke — the sale of canned unicorn meat. You have probably seen this if you have the internet. And you probably have the internet.

Now ThinkGeek has been served with a Cease and Desist Order from the National Pork Board, asking them to stop selling unicorn meat using their registered trademark THE OTHER WHITE MEAT.

(by Alejandra Bartoliche)

In the world of bizarre internet turf wars, after astronomer Stuart Robbins showed that astrologer Terry Nazon’s claims about Mayans were inaccurate (with the help of an archaeologist), Ms. Nazon started to impersonate Mr. Robbins on various websites. While posting under the guise of Mr. Robbins, Ms. Nazon posted complaints about others being “anonymous cowards” and “phonies”.

Mashable is reporting some interesting stats regarding the use of Facebook statuses to deal with partners. While the stats are almost certainly incredibly inaccurate (they come from an online survey which exists on a Facebook page for those trying to hook up with strangers through Facebook), it does raise an interesting question: How often (and for what reasons) do people create fraudulent (in which we mean untrue, rather than illegal) updates via social media?