Richard Simmons sent the interwebs into a frenzy on Monday when he tweeted that he was dying. You see, the public mistakenly took that to mean… that he was dying. But he’s not! Well, he is, in the sense that “we all are dying,” as he further said in his post. But the point is he is not presently dying. He just wanted to inspire us all to seize the day and take care of our health. And he never meant to cause upset or confusion by posting a nuanced message on Twitter that could have ambiguous interpretations. Are we clear now?

Richard Simmons got social media users working up a sweat.

The beloved fitness personality — who rose to fame in the 1970s and ‘80s thanks to his eccentric and energetic personality and his accessible at-home “Sweatin’ to the Oldies” line of aerobics videos — posted a cryptic message Monday on X, formerly Twitter, that confused and concerned a lot of users.

“I have some news to tell you. Please don’t be sad. I am …dying,” Simmons began his post. “Oh I can see your faces now. The truth is we all are dying. Every day we live we are getting closer to our death. Why am I telling you this?”

Although some wrote off the post as just a joke — especially since Simmons followed up that tweet with a thread of health tips — its wording never specifies whether Simmons is just trying to make light of the fleetingness of life or an actual life-threatening diagnosis.

It was especially bewildering because Richards has been reclusive from public life since 2014, as was pointed out in Dan Taberski’s popular 2017 podcast, “Missing Richard Simmons.”

The tweet even seemed to confuse media outlets that reached out to Simmons’ reps to verify whether or not the 75-year-old aerobics instructor was in good health.

The tweet seemed to cause such a fiasco that hours later, Simmons tweeted a clarification.

“Sorry many of you have gotten upset about my message today. Even the press has gotten in touch with me,” Simmons wrote. “I am not dying. It was a message about saying how we should embrace every day that we have. Sorry for this confusion.”

Tom Estey, a spokesman for Simmons, clarified to CNN that Simmons is fine.

“I can confirm with one hundred percent certainty that Richard is not dying,” Estey told CNN. “He’s, in fact, very healthy and happy. The sole purpose of the post was meant to be inspirational.”

[From HuffPost]

To be fair to Richard, a quick perusal of his Twitter shows that he routinely posts inspirationally-styled messages. So his explanation about Monday’s tweet makes sense when taken in the context of all his be-good-to-yourself tweets. Furthermore, Richard has been mainly a private person for the past 10 years. He doesn’t want the spotlight these days. He just wants to drop into people’s feeds here and there to remind everyone to give themselves a hug, or relay the all-plot, no-drama story of how he bought his first Barbra Streisand record. With this particular tweet, Richard’s words and tone didn’t make sense on the platform the way they did in his head. And then Twitter did what Twitter does. I hope Richard dusts off his spandex and keeps sharing his somewhat random yet overall positive anecdotes.

All that said, did I miss a horoscope reading foretelling that Monday March 18 would be a day to fact check death announcements? Cause that sounds more like some Ides of March sh*t to me! The day began with King Charles III being cast out by a (likely) Russian disinformation campaign, and then Fitness King Richard the First fell on the sword (of his own words). I’m dubbing it the Ides of Twitter. Beware!!

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

photos credit: Getty and Optic Photos, PacificCoastNews / Avalon, Dominic Chan / Wenn / Avalon

A few weeks ago, Lindsay Lohan confirmed that a Freaky Friday sequel was in the works, with Lindsay and Jamie Lee Curtis reprising their original roles from the 2003 version of the movie. Well, I guess Lisa Ann Walter also wants to get in on the LiLo action. Lisa Ann and Lindsay worked together on the 1998 version of The Parent Trap, with the former playing Chessy, the nanny for one of the twins who’d been separated at birth. People caught up with Lisa Ann and asked if she’d be down to work with Lindsay again in the future. Lisa Ann responded with a resounding “hell yes” (paraphrasing) and proposed either doing a Parent Trap sequel or having LiLo as a guest on Abbott Elementary, playing one of Melissa Schemmenti’s relatives.

Abbott Elementary star Lisa Ann Walter is keen to collaborate with Lindsay Lohan again! Walter, who costarred with Lohan in the 1998 version of The Parent Trap, told PEOPLE at the NAACP Image Awards in Los Angeles on Saturday that there are two fun ways she and Lohan, 37, could work together.

“Yes, absolutely,” Walter, 60, says when asked if she would revive her Parent Trap character, Chessy. “I would love to go back for another version of it — or if [Lohan] wants to come on to our show, I’d love that, too.”

Walter plays Philadelphia second-grade teacher Melissa Schemmenti on the popular ABC sitcom Abbott Elementary, which won outstanding comedy series at the NAACP Image Awards.

The actress and mom of four previously said she’d “love’ if Lohan played her redheaded relative on the show. “I guess we’d have to make her a relative since we’re both redheads — since I’m a ‘redhead,’ and she actually is,” Walter told Entertainment Tonight in January.

In The Parent Trap, Lohan famously played Hallie Parker and Annie James, 11-year-old twins who randomly meet at a summer camp after being separated at birth, while Walter played Hallie’s nanny.

If Lohan guest starred on Abbott Elementary, she would join an acclaimed cast on the show, which has won four Emmys, including an outstanding casting statuette, since its 2021 series premiere.

[From People]

Lindsay’s enjoying a lowkey career resurgence right now, so I don’t blame Lisa Ann for wanting to get her on board for an AE guest appearance. We’ve already met Melissa’s sister, Kristen Marie, a teacher at a rival school who’s played by Lauren Weedman. I suppose Lindsay playing another relative could work, too, but hear me out. Why not just combine both of Lisa Ann’s ideas and have Lindsay guest star as a character whom Melissa used to nanny for? Lindsay seems to be playing it “safe” with her comeback, as in, she’s sticking to playing romantic leads in Netflix rom coms and understandably avoiding the Hollywood scene. She also seems eager to not have her past brought up, as well. Taking that into consideration, I’m not sure if she’d want to play a character in conflict with Melissa or if she’d want to stick to playing more of a sweetheart type. But hey, I’m not a sitcom writer, so that’s for someone else to figure out. I’m just saying that out of Melissa’s two suggestions, I’d be more welcome to an Abbott guest appearance because enough already with the remakes/sequels. Plus, a good guest appearance on a popular show does wonders for buying some goodwill from the public. Just ask Bradley Cooper about the positive press he got from his cold open immediately following an awards season where we all collectively rolled our eyes at him. The Internet loved him for quite a few days after that aired.

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Photos credit: Xavier Collin/Image Press Agency/Avalon, IMAGO/RW/mpi099/Avalon, Jeffrey Mayer/Avalon and Getty

FKA Twigs covers British Vogue and explains how she burnt off her eyebrows. Did they never grow back?? [OMG Blog]
Anne Hathaway was a huge hit at SXSW. [LaineyGossip]
Kim Kardashian basically takes her private jet to the grocery store. [Jezebel]
The Walking Dead is finally giving some fan-service. [Pajiba]
Dwayne Johnson showed how consent works in real time. [Buzzfeed]
Aryna Sabalenka’s boyfriend Konstantine Koltsov passed away suddenly. [JustJared]
Richard Simmons is not dying! [Socialite Life]
Everything to know about Kristen Stewart’s fiancee, Dylan Meyer. [Hollywood Life]
The many faces of Glenn Close. [Seriously OMG]
Priyanka Chopra looks amazing in Gaurav Gupta. [RCFA]

Even when grumpy Daniel Craig was still James Bond, there were endless conversations about who would be cast as the “new James Bond.” Barbara Broccoli – who is mostly in charge of casting new Bonds – always insisted that the role was Daniel’s for as long as he wanted, but No Time To Die was finally his last one and he’s definitely not coming back. So they spent three years hunting for the new Bond and they’ve settled on… Aaron Taylor Johnson?

Aaron Taylor-Johnson ‘has been formally offered the opportunity to play James Bond’, putting an end to months of speculation regarding Daniel Craig’s successor. The actor, 33, is yet to officially accept the role, but should he do so he will become only the seventh actor to play the iconic British secret agent since the franchise launched in 1962.

A recent poll suggested Idris Elba was still the public’s number one choice for the role, despite being 51 – old for a Bond candidate – and already ruling himself out of the running in order to focus on his crime drama, Luther.

But Aaron, who is known for his roles in Nocturnal Animals, Kick-Ass, Nowhere Boy and Avengers: Age of Ultron, has landed the coveted part, reports The Sun.

A source said: ‘Bond is Aaron’s job, should he wish to accept it. The formal offer is on the table and they are waiting to hear back.

As far as Eon is concerned, Aaron is going to sign his contract in the coming days and they can start preparing for the big announcement.’

MailOnline has contacted representatives for Aaron for comment. Responding to the rumours that he could step into Bond’s shoes last week, Aaron played coy, telling Numero: ‘I find it charming and wonderful that people see me in that role. I take it as a great compliment.’

[From The Daily Mail]

I wish it was Idris Elba too, but I don’t think Idris even wants it anymore and he is sort of too old, especially since they like to use the same actor for at least three or four films. Dev Patel was right there though – and I think Dev would have done amazing work as James Bond. As for Aaron… I have this view of him as kind of too-whiny-sounding to play Bond, but he’s such a shapeshifter, he might actually be able to pull it off. A James Bond born in 1990. That makes him a young Millennial, correct? He will be the first 007 who is younger than me. I don’t know how to feel about that.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

In 2020-21, Robert Lacey released a royal book called Battle of Brothers, all about the larger falling out between Prince William and Prince Harry. In the first edition of the book, Lacey was quite critical of William, leaving enough breadcrumbs to reveal that Huevo has always been a rage-monster who flies off the handle (sometimes violently) often. Lacey also made it clear, in the original version, that William was incandescent with rage and jealousy towards Harry, that William did everything to “edge out” his brother, and on and on. Then, for the reissue of Lacey’s book, magically he had new sources deep within the Camp Huevo and wouldn’t you know, Harry and Meghan did some bad things too, and William was merely justifiably angry at them! Or something. Well, adding to the sense of doom and gloom around the Windsors these days, for some reason, the Daily Mail decided to remind everyone of all of this: “Not-so-Sweet William! There was a time when the prince was prone to rant and rave, says a leading royal author… (And can you guess the target of his anger?).”

Prince William, it is often said, has come a long way. The ‘Party Prince’ of yesteryear has today been replaced by a loving father who rarely fails to cut a dignified and often humorous figure in public. At 41, the Prince of Wales is not only a key force in the monarchy but popular with the public, too. The outlook has not always been so sunny, though, as author Robert Lacey explains in his best-selling biography, Battle of Brothers. Storms were all too frequent.

Perhaps that is to have been expected. King Charles himself has been no stranger to the occasional outburst. Nonetheless, William’s step-mother Camilla was said to have been taken aback by the ferocity of his tantrums.

‘He has proved no Sweet William when roused,’ writes Lacey. ‘In the years after her 2005 marriage to Prince Charles, Camilla recounted to members of her own family and close friends her surprise at discovering this unexpected side to Prince Charming – “the boy’s got a temper!” Charles’s wife was horrified at the ranting and raving that William unleashed on occasion against her husband in her presence. The rows were shattering, by Camilla’s account in the early days, with William doing the shouting and Charles submitting meekly on the receiving end. As she described it, William held nothing back.’

It was a wrath, suggests Lacey, commensurate with William’s sense of himself as future King. Today, it is largely hidden, but younger brother Harry has his own views on William’s anger. Writing in his memoir, Spare, Harry claims that in one 2019 row at Nottingham Cottage in the grounds of Kensington Palace, William had ‘grabbed me by the collar, ripping my necklace, and he knocked me to the floor.’ A dog bowl was apparently broken in the fracas. (Prince William has never given his version of events.)

[From The Daily Mail]

The more I see of how William operates or “functions” at a professional/public level, the more I realize that he has so little in the way of management skills. He can’t manage his office, he can’t manage his emotions, he can’t manage his temper, he can’t manage to read his briefing papers, he can’t manage the patience to read a book, he can’t manage a crisis he created, and on and on. I would argue that both of his parents probably tried to teach him those management skills in various ways in his childhood but none of it really stuck. So we have an heir to the throne who is temperamental, violent, tantrum-prone and unable to manage his way out of any situation. The real question is: why are they bringing this up again right now?

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Instar, Backgrid.

One of the biggest “tells” of the Rose Hanbury story is that Prince William’s defenders are still desperate, five years later, to pretend that the whole thing started on social media, or that the rumors were only spread by “Sussex Squad” people with an agenda. While we might not be able to provide evidence of an affair between the Marchioness of Cholmondeley and Prince William, there is ample evidence that the affair rumors spread like wildfire in aristocratic society in 2018-19, and that William’s people have done the most to cover up any speculation, even sending out legal threats to British outlets. Which makes Stephen Colbert’s jokes last week even funnier. All it took was a three-minute segment on The Late Show for a careful, five-year coverup to get blown to smithereens. While the British media is still treading carefully, the story cannot be contained internationally. I’m curious to see if the British media even picks this up as well – Rose’s lawyer denied the rumors on the record to Business Insider.

Rose Hanbury would very much like to be excluded from any Princess Kate Middleton narrative, it seems. Hanbury (whose full name is Sarah Rose Hanbury), 40, reportedly denied rumors that Middleton’s public absence is due to an affair with Prince William after Stephen Colbert brought the idea to the masses.

“The rumors are completely false,” Hanbury’s lawyers allegedly told Business Insider on Saturday, March 16, days after the Marchioness of Cholmondeley was name-dropped on The Late Show With Stephen Colbert. (Us Weekly has reached out to Hanbury for comment.)

[From Us Weekly]

So, a flat denial. What’s interesting is that I think this is the first time Rose’s lawyer has ever gone on the record? Before now, it’s always been “sources close to Rose” or “sources close to William.” Plus, it’s easier to deny something which hasn’t been happening for years, by my guess. I doubt William is still playing hide-the-salami in rose bushes. There were rumors, a few years back, that there’s another woman, someone London-based.

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Getty.

Last week, in the middle of the Princess of Wales’s Mother’s Day photo fiasco, a Daily Mail columnist started making sense. The columnist was Liz Jones and she wrote several scathing pieces about how Kensington Palace is probably lying about everything and Prince William was “ungentlemanly” for shoving Kate under the bus to protect himself from the photo fallout. It was great! Well, Liz Jones has a new column and it’s in the same vein. Other people have caught up to it too – this weekend’s “sighting” of Kate at a Windsor garden store is yet another weird moment in a series of very weird moments. Now Jones and her ilk are publicly begging Huevo and Buttons to get their acts together. (Note: Liz Jones wrote this before the garden shop video was published.)

Kate still hasn’t been photographed: “We are informed that William and Catherine were spotted at the Windsor farm shop on Saturday and the next day went to watch their children play sport. Yet, in this age of smart phones, no one – just no one – took a photo. I was on the phone to three girlfriends yesterday when we heard the rumour that a big announcement was impending. We were terrified. In tears. To then hear, a few hours later, that the Royal couple had been spotted out relaxing was like a kick in the teeth. We felt foolish. And we’re still not convinced. In fact, we feel royally shafted. If the Royal Family is all about respect, about doing the right thing, I for one feel completely disrespected. Have we spent all these days worried sick for nothing?”

The Kate speculation is not bullying: I am tired of commentators saying that all this speculation is bullying or mere time wasting. One Sunday paper tried to dismiss the online concern for Kate as ‘prurient’, a cruel theatre, both ‘degrading and infantilising’. Really? I agree with Earl Spencer when he said that the attention focused on his sister Diana was far more dangerous than the current online scrutiny of Kate. The fact is that we play detective because we care. So, stop trying to downplay the doctored Mother’s Day photo. A source close to the Waleses has been quoted saying that Kate’s not a ‘show pony’. But, in the nicest possible way, that’s EXACTLY what she is. Ninety-nine point nine percent of us will only ever know the Princess of Wales through the lens of a camera. The late Queen once said that monarchy must be seen to be believed. Now? We don’t believe what we are seeing.

Image is everything: If she wants to be ‘amateur’ about her pictures, as she put it, then she’s in the wrong job. Because Kate matters. She could be Queen in a few short years. As long as she’s okay, we’re okay. We need her to be stable, happy, smiling in a world that is very far from that. And we need her to accept that a portrait of a film star or model in a magazine – possibly ‘tweaked’ – is completely different to an eagerly awaited news photograph. Reputable picture agencies cannot be party to any distortion in this age of artificial intelligence. Most newspaper reports and television bulletins are still patting us on the head as if we’re children, acting as if everything is going to plan.

The phone calls of support: One stated that the palace phones have been ‘ringing off the hook’ with good wishes from the public. I don’t believe that for one second. Who rings a landline these days when they can post online?

The solutions: The solution to all this speculation and ridicule is simple: don’t ignore us, as the Prince of Wales did when he arrived for his Earthshot speech on Thursday evening. When a reporter called out, ‘William, how’s Catherine? there was no acknowledgement at all, which just seemed clumsy, given the furore. William: we understand you want to protect your family, to have a private bubble. But Earthshot was a public moment. Why not smile and say she’s doing fine? Oh, and don’t take four weeks off over Easter leaving others to hold the fort. Kate: be seen smiling and waving for a few seconds. King Charles is doing it, valiantly, although he looks pasty. Hiding away makes a mockery of all your mental health initiatives, about how important it is to be open. The world is waiting, with bated breath. Yet no one can produce a photo from that farm shop trip, not even a blurry profile.

[From The Daily Mail]

Before the Mother’s Day photo furor, I was on the conspiracy bandwagon that the only reason they hadn’t released a photo of Kate is because they couldn’t – either she wasn’t conscious or she was in such a poor state, they didn’t want any lens on her. But now? After the events of the past two weeks? I think a huge part of what’s happening is stubbornness and arrogance on William and Kate’s part. Like, I still believe that some weird sh-t had happened in the past three months and we probably don’t know the half of it. But all of the media-management part of this, the communications part of it, is just a reflection of William and Kate’s arrogance, stupidity and incompetence, and their inability to hire effective, capable people to help them. What’s incredible is that people are starting to notice too. When the Mail is running multiple pieces calling them out, you know something has shifted in a big way.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

As I said in the earlier post, when I saw TMZ’s video of Prince William and the Princess of Wales walking out of the Windsor Farm Shop, I thought it was them but I also thought the whole thing was weird. The fact that there was a video all along, but the Sun ran the story without the video or photos for 24 hours. The fact that the woman in the video seems to have a completely different gait than the real Kate. The fact that there appears to be Christmas decorations up in the middle of March. The fact that Kate is carrying what looks like a somewhat heavy bag following her abdominal surgery. The fact that Kate is walking briskly and without aid following what we were told was major abdominal surgery. The fact that no one can seemingly get a clear photo or video of Kate and everything looks like the photos were taken with a potato. The fact that Kate’s face suddenly appears quite slim and un-puffy, after TMZ published blurry car photos two weeks ago where she looked sort of round-faced from steroids. It’s all just weird.

So, I don’t know what to believe anymore but I thought you guys would enjoy the theories and the social media. Next week will be the three-month anniversary of the last time Kate did an “event” – the walk to church in Sandringham. That was the last time anyone photographed her with a real camera. Things have gotten so nutty in three months. Kensington Palace has bungled all of this so badly, of course everyone questions whatever dumbass video they did in collusion with the Sun/TMZ. Of course we’ve got regular old celebrities and Twitter journalists commenting about their disbelief. All of this could have been stopped if KP had just released an unedited photo or video of Kate weeks ago. The fact that they’re still resorting to these increasingly bizarre stunts to provide “proof of life” is really telling.

That ain’t Kate….

— Andy Cohen (@Andy) March 19, 2024

I’ve unblurred two of the stills taken of Will and Kate at the farm shop using AI pic.twitter.com/3TzG27zoN9

— Lorraine King (@lorrainemking) March 18, 2024

This Kate Middleton story is crazy. I haven’t seen a coverup like this since the Secret Service deleted their text messages from January 6th.

— I Smoked The RNC (@BlackKnight10k) March 18, 2024

WHOMST?!

You mean to tell me that TMZ couldn’t get a closeup and they’re literally across the street?? Something ain’t right in the fish and chips. https://t.co/VUHNnDSlEx

— April (@ReignOfApril) March 18, 2024

“these Kate Middleton pics will silence internet critics” I don’t think u understand how badly you’ve fucked this. there are now people on the internet who could SHAKE HER HAND and still claim she’s four cats in a wig

— Smooth Dunk (@SmoothDunk) March 18, 2024

that’s fake Melania https://t.co/dQNn1VBshq

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) March 18, 2024

TMZ: “Kate Middleton spotted out with Prince William.”

Twitter: “That is not Kate.”

pic.twitter.com/c96fZlaMBu

— NUFF (@nuffsaidny) March 18, 2024

A powerful reminder of the symbiotic relationship enjoyed by the royals and the media.

A clear breach of privacy.

Kensington Palace is silent. pic.twitter.com/9Ok0Y77pFw

— Peter Hunt (@_PeterHunt) March 19, 2024

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, cover courtesy of The Sun.

If there’s one thing the Buckingham Palace courtiers love to do, it’s mess with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s profiles on royal.uk, the official website of the British royal family. In previous years, BP webmasters have played stupid games with vanishing and reappearing royal titles and HRHs. Let’s not forget the seven-weeks-long delay in adding Princess Lilibet to the line of succession list online, nor the delay in adding Lili and Archie’s titles last year. All of the updates and games were always very stupid and petty, and a very obvious effort to “create a story” of the Windsors snubbing the Sussexes, especially their children.

So, I thought this latest story would be another dumbf–k “let’s focus on how Buckingham Palace is snubbing the Sussexes on royal.uk again” deflection from the Waleses’ sh-tshow. But no, it’s not like that at all? While royal.uk merged Harry and Meghan’s profiles into one page (they used to have individual pages), the palace webmaster added flattering photos of Harry & Meghan and added the palace’s statements about Harry and Meghan “stepping back” from being working royals. Even more fascinating is that royal.uk now links to sussex.com, with this statement: “Information about the current work of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex can be found on their official website: sussex.com.”

Also notable: the palace webmaster isn’t playing fast and loose with their titles. The page notes, “The Duke and Duchess were given their titles by Queen Elizabeth II on the day of their marriage.” The palace clarifies that Harry is “The Duke of Sussex, Earl of Dumbarton and Baron Kilkeel. He was made a Knight Commander of the Royal Victorian Order (KCVO) by Queen Elizabeth II in June 2015.” Meghan is “The Duchess of Sussex, Countess of Dumbarton and Baroness Kilkeel.” While there should be HRHs attached, once again, Harry and Meghan have “voluntarily” decided not to use them.

Again, while all of this is being promoted in the British media as a snub, it doesn’t actually look that way to me? Harry and Meghan’s bios/pages were merged, as if the palace has made their peace with the fact that the Sussex marriage is fine and Meghan can’t be “removed.” They linked to sussex.com, almost like sussex.com has the king’s stamp of approval? It’s a hell of a thing. Super-curious.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid.

Embed from Getty Images
We all knew it was just a matter of time before Taylor Swift started impacting the fields of seismology and geology. Last July a Seattle Eras Tour stop set off enough tremors that the concert showed up on a seismograph. This prompted the California Institute of Technology to put sensors in place at LA’s SoFi Stadium in time for Swift’s August dates for further research into her earth-shattering capabilities, being dubbed “SwiftQuakes.” Was it the instruments? Was it the amps? Was it Swift herself, bearing the voice of a prophetess equal parts lyrical and powerful? Nope, it was all the fans jumping up and down. Here’s more of the science behind the results:

Gabrielle Tepp, author and amateur bass guitarist, said that the harmonics of the “concert tremor” that was recorded look a lot like those from volcanoes or trains, not quakes. They were low frequency and not heard by the human ear. Large music festivals and stadium concerts produce similar vibration signals that resemble a harmonic tremor.

The biggest bang came when Swift sang “Shake It Off.” The tremor was equivalent to about a magnitude 2 quake. Instead of using magnitude, which is energy given off in a moment, scientists measured radiant energy, which is given off over time, for example, during a song. Tepp dubbed it “song strength.”

After conversions done based on an American Geophysical Union study, these are the top five energy-releasing songs from Swift:

1. Shake It Off — about magnitude 1.798.
2. You Belong With Me — about magnitude 1.796.
3. Love Story — about magnitude 1.76.
4. Cruel Summer — about magnitude 1.71.
5. 22 — about magnitude 1.64.

“Keep in mind this energy was released over a few minutes compared to a second for an earthquake of that size,” Tepp said in a news release. “Based on the maximum strength of shaking, the strongest tremor was equivalent to a magnitude 2 earthquake.”

She could identify 43 of 45 songs just by looking at the spectrograms — a graph of the strength of various signal frequencies overtime. The other two songs did not register.

“My gut feeling was that if you have a harmonic signal that is nice like these, it had to be from the music or the instruments or something,” Tepp said, admitting that her initial thoughts were wrong.

She was so surprised that she set up her own trial, playing Swift’s music over a PA next to a motion sensor. Then she grabbed her own guitar and rocked out to her own version of “Love Story.” It was not her bass beats that triggered the motion sensor.

“Even though I was not great at staying in the same place, I ended up jumping around in a small circle, like at a concert,” Tepp said. “I was surprised at how clear the signal came out.”

She said bass beats are rounder on the spectrogram, while jumping creates spikes.

Now, imagine the 70,000 Swifties all jumping together to “Shake It Off.”

“The structural response of the stadium showed nearly equal shaking intensifies in the vertical and horizontal directions at frequencies that match the seismic signals recorded outside the stadium,” the study said. “All evidence considered, we interpret the signal source as primarily crowd motion in response to the music.”

[From NY Post]

Well, duh, I could’ve told you the results would show that “nearly equal shaking intensifies in the vertical and horizontal directions at frequencies that match the seismic signals recorded outside the stadium.” Come on, it’s not rocket science — it’s rock n roll science! (Dad Joke #1.) At the very least, I could’ve told you that a bunch of people jumping has a reaction. I grew up in San Francisco and remember having many earthquake drills in school. My parents even had to pack me an in-case-of-the-apocalypse lunch bag that was kept in the classroom. I peeked inside once and read the note my mother had written on a napkin, with the opening lines: “Dear Kismet, If you’re reading this we are having an earthquake. Either that, or your father is jumping up and down on the bed.”

I hope this study inspires young minds out there to get into science. Just think about it, kids: your job as an adult could be to record the results of you rocking out on a guitar. Or to watch for when the lines on a graph go nuts to different pop songs, thus giving you the intellectual authority to say “‘Shake It Off?’ More like ‘Quake It Off!’” (Dad Joke #2 and I’ll stop now.)

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Makenzie (Taylor’s Version) (@in.that.taylorhaze)

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Taylor Swift (@taylorswift)

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Taylor Swift (@taylorswift)

Photos credit: Backgrid, Getty and via Instagram