I was just watching CBC. They had a rerun of This Hour Has 22 Minutes. I think the original aired Oct 30 2017. On the show, a lady is promoting a book entitled:

"Biospheric Superabundance: Subscending the Agri-Logistical. Epistemologically-Ontological Anthropocentris"

Of course, it was all a joke, but does this title actually have any reasonable meaning in laymans terms?

And could the contents of such a book really be described as "uber-ubiquitous grail quest mythos vis-à-vis hyper objectification in the face of cosmotheistic macro-accidentalism" or is that a complete impossibility?

I found a copy of the transcript here: http://videoonfav.blogspot.com/2017/10/youtube-daily-social-oct-30-2017.html

  • Technically, yes, it does.
    – Kris
    May 15, 2019 at 10:45
  • It’s possible to construct a narrative for what it means and justify it based on the words used, but that has no relation to what it was intended to mean, if anything. Anything grammatical can be assigned a meaning, and a plausible argument made for it, even if that argument is built of nothing but hot air. Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.
    – Dan Bron
    May 15, 2019 at 11:53

1 Answer 1


The words are real and the meanings may be teased out of, or pulled from their definitions. Their use in creating a joke should not be ignored.

Look up the Sokal hoax. Here a completely made up article was created and published in a peer reviewed journal. It's nonsensical nature was revealed promptly with questions about the value or reliability of the journal. Even then the nonsensical nature of the article was not accepted by several members who insisted they understood the meaning and insight of the made up article.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.