Effing Same-Sex Marriage, How Does it Work? (or: He might be insane, he’s definitely a clown, and he’s seeking a posse)

This one takes weird headline of the day:

Not only does this chemical engineering student believe he’s got scientific proof that same-sex marriage is “evil” (the term he used); he also thinks he’s going to win a Nobel prize. Someone needs to teach this guy how science is actually done, as well as what a false analogy is.

Here are some of his proofs:

A bar magnet is a horizontal magnet that has the North Pole and the South Pole and when you bring two bar magnets and you bring the North Pole together you find that the two North Poles will not attract. They will repel, that is, they will push away themselves showing that a man should not attract a man. If you bring two South Poles together you find that the two South Poles will not attract indicating that same sex marriage should not hold. A female should not attract a female as South Pole of a magnet does not attract the South Pole of a magnet. But, when you bring a North Pole of a magnet and a South Pole of a magnet they will attract because they are not the same, indicating that a man will attract a woman because of the way nature has made a female.

Even in physics when you study what is called electrostatics, you found that when you rub particles together they don’t attract each other but when you rub particle in another medium they will attract each other. For example, if you use your biro and rub it on your hair, after rubbing, try to  bring small pieces of paper they will attract because one is charged while the other one is not charged. But if both of them are charged they don’t attract, which means that man cannot attract another man because they are the same, and a woman should not attract a woman because they are the same. That is how I used physics to prove gay marriage wrong.

In chemistry, I used chemical reactions and we have different types of chemical reactions. We have double decomposition reaction, decomposition reaction, neutralisation reaction and reduction oxidation reaction. But in chemistry I used a simple one known as neutralisation reaction which is a reaction where an acid reacts with a base to give you salt and water. For example, when you bring surphuric acid and you reacts it with sodium hydroxide which is a base you are going to have salt and water.  That tells you that the acid is a different body, the base is a different body and they will react. But if you bring an acid and you pour it on top of an acid chemistry there will be no reaction.  If you bring water and pour it on top it shows that there will be no reaction. If you bring a base either sodium hydroxide and you pour it on top of a sodium hydroxide you find out that there will be reaction showing that a man on top of a man will have no reaction. A woman on top of a woman will have no reaction, that is what chemistry is showing.

I could show him a couple of internet videos that clearly show a woman on top of a woman, and oh wow, is there a reaction.

His “discoveries” about same-sex marriage are not his only breakthroughs. He also claims:

• “I have also been able to prove that the mathematical symbol pi which people thought of as 22 over 7 is not actually 22 over , but  rather a transcendental number while 22 over 7 is a rational number.” [Ed. note: Not his discovery, and well-known for a long time.]
• I also proved that watching television in the dark impacts negatively on one’s eyes and by God’s grace, I was the first person to use scientific instruments to prove it in the whole world…The reason for this is because there is a lot of difference in illuminants (brightness) between the television screen and the dark background in the room known as the periphery.

He’s endorsed by Dr. Henry Boyo, Department of Physics at the University of Lagos:

I have known him (Stanley) for the past five years. He is a very sound guy. He is genuine in terms of his scientific discoveries. He has appeared on NTA and SilverBird televisions where he demonstrated his knowledge of science. When you talk to him, you will know that he understands what he is talking about. He is convincing.

He conceptualised the idea of using sciences and mathematics to prove gay marriage wrong and we have worked it here. Some people make claims to religion but he went a step further to use science and mathematics to prove gay marriage wrong. He used my laboratory here (UNILAG) to carry out his researches. He is the originator of the idea, he deserves commendation and we support the idea. You can quote me anywhere, the guy’s concept is germane and it has been scientifically proven to be true.

“When you talk to him, you will know that he understands what he is talking about. He is convincing.” There’s all the scientific proof I need right there!