User talk:PolarBearInTheJungle

Archives:

A discussion on archive links and their merit on this talkpage
I hate to be pedantic, but you might want to put a link to your archives here.  Sam   Tally-ho!  02:19, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I might. I might not. Is there a template for that? Theory of Practice "...and we do love you madly." 02:20, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Probably. Or you could make one. Not too difficult.  Sam   Tally-ho!  02:25, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
 * talkpage will work. Peter Droid whisperer 02:26, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Nihilist 02:26, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Nihilist 02:26, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Your Undos on the Low Carb page
When you undo these changes you are maintaining false and misleading information. There are "refs" that you are restoring that aren't refs at all, and others that point to dead links or articles that don't support the point being made. That page is a mess and the edits I'm making are fully in line with the RW guidelines. If you disagree with any specific change, go ahead and make an edit or bring it up in talk. But you're reverting a page back to poorly written nonsense CarbShark (talk) 18:54, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
 * It seems that there is a healthy contingent of people on the relevant talk page who are questioning the content you are inserting. Given that, at least today, nothing you inserted has any references, I'm not sure if there's any reason to think that your material is any more valuable than what's already there. Theory of Practice "...and we do love you madly." 18:56, 27 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Most of the changes I made today were clearing up grammar and language and qualifying unsupported statements. Example page said most of the experts believed ... But there is no reference to quantify. I changed to many believed. One reference wasn't a reference, but was simply a addition to the description of ketosis. I put that in the body where it belongs and tidied up the grammar, removing claims that were not substantiated or supported in any way. I don't believe I made any new, unsupported claims, but if I did, point them out, remove them specifically and I will correct.CarbShark (talk) 19:04, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

You're hilarious
May I ask whether you have any reasons why you blindly oppose my edit? Or is it just the typical fair-and-balanced RationalWiki hypocrisy? 95.14.215.211 (talk)
 * You're trying to create some sort of universal truth with nothing more than some dictionary definitions and some very small ideas. Bush-league pseudo-intellectualism. Run off, I think your mother is calling. Theory of Practice "...and we do love you madly." 22:40, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
 * It's RationalWiki. No one asserts universal truth. It's not pseudo-intellectualism, it is a popular misconception to consider individualism as selfishness, while clearly it is not so. The only thing pseudo-intellectual here is your blind refusal and ad hominem. 95.14.215.211 (talk)
 * Okay. Theory of Practice "...and we do love you madly." 22:48, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
 * What is in my (individualist) best interest right now is to punch you and (selfishly) steal your computer so you'll stop bitching on my website. --Just relax, and stay funny (talk) 22:50, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Please do. Perhaps that'll help clear the difference between the two words. I'm bored of this place anyway. It seems like a left Conservapedia, but less funny. 95.14.215.211 (talk)
 * The difference is that selfishness necessarily follows from individualism, and that selfishness is a necessary and sufficient condition for individualism.--Just relax, and stay funny (talk) 00:33, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I'd really love to see how you jumped to that bare assertion conclusion, especially when selfishness, lacking consideration for others, is unrelated to individualism, endorsing freedom of individuals over collective control. Don't let the unreadable ramblings of Rand skew your point of view. 141.196.15.122 (talk)
 * Seeing as this conversation no longer has anything to do with me, please take it elsewhere. Thanks. Theory of Practice "...and we do love you madly." 18:22, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Though it was exciting. 95.14.198.5 (talk)

eh
you seen this one? nobsSay hello to my leetle friend 19:19, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
 * That's fucking horrible. A bloody libertarian nightmare. Theory of Practice "...and we do love you madly." 19:20, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Welcome to 21st century America. nobsSay hello to my leetle friend 19:23, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
 * That's what happens when people get convinced that there's something wrong with paying taxes. Theory of Practice "...and we do love you madly." 19:27, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
 * It's the economic realities. Disclosure: this is my hometown; my family (both sides) emigrated there by about 1900; Wisconsin was the first state in the Union to have an income tax (before the feds did). There just are not the jobs there anymore. Living standards have declined. That's why I moved out. Why pay more taxes when you income and living standards are in decline? nobsSay hello to my leetle friend 19:32, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
 * This used to be a country that made things. Capitalists shipped all the jobs making things to places with no unions, no safety standards, no social safety nets, and then convinced Americans that a laptop should only cost $300. Theory of Practice "...and we do love you madly." 19:49, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
 * That's water under the bridge; I can't help but think this sheriff has an eye on electoral politics -- using a PSA as a re-election ad. And I don't even know his party affiliation. nobsSay hello to my leetle friend 20:26, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Of course, what the Sheriff is doing is burying the lede. The real message is "the police have failed, and continue to fail, in their duty." Why... nothing's being done about this is a different question. Ochotonaprincepsnot a pokémon 18:34, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Budget cuts & furloughs (the sheriff said there's something like 4500 fewer man/personhours on the street this year. Now, some might say, "raise taxes", or "borrow from China", etc.; but this is a political question which it appears the voters and taxpayers have decided upon. nobsSay hello to my leetle friend 18:57, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

I will never forget how you betrayed me, vile scum
You are degenerate scum, I don't know how you sleep at night. Foster the Cruel is your name, you are a monster, a tyrant and a prick. I hate you with all of my being, I hope you only ever understand suffering and pain, for my loathing of you is of such an extent. I hate you so much. ProudTory (talk) 11:43, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
 * You got it all wrong, buddy. "Foster the Cruel" is my name. Foster the cruel (talk) 17:22, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
 * "hate" might be excessive but I think most can agree with "vile scum". nobsSay hello to my leetle friend 15:14, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
 * But I'm a great dancer! And I make all my own clothes! Also, my mom says I'm cool. Theory of Practice "...and we do love you madly."  16:38, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Join the club, Tory. This scumbag has tried semi-successfully to ruin my life on more than one occasion. Occasionaluse (talk) 16:51, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
 * A tired old troll, and an exiled oprichnik. Are you sure you want those two in your club, Occasionaluse? --TheLateGatsby (talk) 17:09, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Atheism & Humanism as Bourgeois Ideology
Something that might interest you, from the blog attached to the Autodidact site:, , Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 00:33, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Just the intro is enough to make ListenerX start wailing.  01:25, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, quite. I will have to listen to the podcast sometime, but going by the summary, although I agree with the podcaster that many atheists are not hard enough on "secular forms of unreason," I think we are in strong disagreement over what those "secular forms of unreason" are. 08:29, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Not entirely, actually. He takes on some aspects of Marxism in the third post. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 03:50, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I saw that, but from where I am standing, out here in the philosophic playpen of Petty-Bourgeois Naïveté, that looks like a sectarian inveighing against heretics. In general this fellow appears to be one of those cranks who think that everyone else is wrong about most things. 05:25, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
 * "...one of those cranks who think that everyone else is wrong about most things." Coming from you, on a site like this, I had to chuckle. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 06:14, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Indeed. I considered ending the previous post with "In other words, just like us." 06:31, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
 * If you two keep being nice to each other, I'll never be able to witness the epic Nebuchadnezzar versus ListenerX smackdown I've been looking forward to so much.  07:07, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

How to science
(Context)

You should ask Nebuchadnezzar. Now that's a person who knows how to science! 03:21, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Email
Kvetchy. Ty Carnival time. 21:19, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Ketchy. Theory of Practice "...and we do love you madly." 21:26, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Guess what time it is here? Ty Carnival time. 21:30, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * And yet, here you are editing a wiki instead of throwing beads at lovely young things. Theory of Practice Peter Tosh > Bob Marley 21:37, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I live in BR, not NOLA. That starts tomorrow evening, because we cannot have nice things. It's much tamer too. Ty Carnival time. 21:40, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Done. Ty Carnival time. 03:39, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Name change
I liked your old name better. (talk to a) Nihilist  07:56, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Noted. Theory of Practice Peter Tosh > Bob Marley 13:53, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

My comment on the Trying To Debias...
I assume you deleted my comment by mistake. Innocent Bystander (talk) 16:23, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
 * And there it is back again. Thanks. Innocent Bystander (talk) 16:24, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
 * That's what happened. Theory of Practice Peter Tosh > Bob Marley 16:25, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Peter Tosh > Bob Marley
Sophie Wilder  liked this  at 17:52, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Blocked Conservapedia users
I'm creating the page once by once, because RW lacks a User Sandbox. Just wait.-- (talk) 03:15, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
 * No. We do not need such an article. And FYI, here is your sandbox. Polar Bear In the Jungle Peter Tosh > Bob Marley 03:16, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

I have sent you a very important email.
This announcement does not exist. No messages have been added. Sophie Wilder  19:40, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Please stop
My signature is not that big anymore. The only thing big about it is the padding to stop the line from running into the text. If no one else finds it a problem than it isn't a problem. ఠ_ఠ Inquisitor Sasha Ehrenstein des Sturmkrieg Sector 03:11, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay. Polar Bear in the Jungle Peter Tosh > Bob Marley 03:16, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I think your signature is far too big and should be resized dramatically. It makes you look like an attention seeker and is, in my humble opinion, pretty bad that we allow such shit.  ToP is not the only one who has issues with it I promise you.  --DamoHi 03:18, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Maybe it's displaying differently in different browsers? In Chrome it's actually no taller than anyone who uses sup or sub tags in their sigs, and it's shorter than a lot of people's. I don't see the problem. 03:41, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Are you looking at the sig after it has been made smaller by ToP? To be fair IQS isn't the only one, and there is nothing in the standards preventing massive sigs.  I don't like it though.  DamoHi 03:43, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh. Yes. Never mind then. And no, it is apparently okay to sign however you want, as is apparent in the document that mentions nothing about signatures and begins "These are not site rules." 03:49, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
 * It could be a browser difference. I realized it looked like crap at first before I made it smaller.  On Chrome it doesn't look that bad.  I think the only thing making it look big is the padding around it.  The background might be making it stand out more.  I'm just trying to create sth better than plain text.  ఠ_ఠ Inquisitor Sasha Ehrenstein des Sturmkrieg Sector  04:34, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Fascinating. Polar Bear in the Jungle Peter Tosh > Bob Marley 04:39, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

A bad situation in Quebec
This is not a healthy state anywhere. We already saw ethnic violence at the PQ victory rally. The Anglos feel just as marginalized at the Francophones did in the 50s, 60s, and 70s. Thats what I'm talking about when I say the PQ isn't good for anyone, but themselves. --Revolverman (talk) 22:58, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Mingus Mingus Mingus Mingus Mingus
Mingus! Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 05:21, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

'Sup buddy?
Long time, no talk. How you been doing? Conservative Punk (talk) 08:37, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Novel Title Suggestions?
Hi Foster the Cruel. Was hoping you could help me choose a good title for my novel. I'm going to release it periodically in chapters every month for the next two years.

Main Title:

The Triumphant Replacement of Tyranny with Liberty by the Hero MarcusCicero

Foster the Cruel's Epic Demise and his Degeneracy

Tales of a Tyrant: Foster the Cruel's War on Liberty

Liberty or Death! MarcusCicero and Freedom.

Chapter one:

MarcusCicero Learns of Foster the Cruel's Devious Schemes, his cunning, and his heartbreaking treachery.

Thanks.

Grrrrr
When you offered that sandbox to me, an IP address got hold of it and wrote a poor article about who-knows-what in my sandbox. Grrrr..--Seonookim (talk) 05:47, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

You are the winrar!
Tebow's no longer with the Jets. Osaka Sun (talk) 17:13, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Reiland Rebaka
So, did you go to CU Boulder? That's where he teaches right? A lot of my ethnic studies major friends were really into him. Rand0 (talk) 09:05, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Mi enemigo
Donde estas? Porque salgas esta mierda? Tendremos nuestro revanja, viejo amigo. Tendremos y disfrutaremos, estoy seguro. Marcus Cicero SPQR 14:08, 5 January 2016 (UTC)