RationalWiki:Saloon bar/Archive61

screw you, guy-who-writes-"Mallard Fillmore"
Beating children is funny!!! You're a hack. P-Foster (talk) 18:59, 5 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I used to read it so I could laugh at the utter stupidness of it. Nowdays I avoid it because the stupidity makes me feel ill.  Case in point... -Ravenhull (talk) 19:02, 5 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Hahahahaha! There's a child in pain!  Hahahaha, oh my sides! --Kels (talk) 19:28, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, I thought it was funny, but probably for all the wrong reasons. &mdash; Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 19:33, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I used to have a babysitter like Kels... -- PsyGremlin  19:34, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Chill P, it's a comic. 20:20, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I once spent a long rainy weekend tracking down Tinsley's inane "footnotes". 22:32, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, I will say that's one of the rare cases where Tinsley is actually bothering to attempt to be funny, rather than just using the strip to make editorial comments. It's not funny, but at least he's trying.


 * I've said before, though perhaps not on here, that there is actually a funny conservative comic strip, and it's Prickly City. (All you need to know is the the little African-American girl is Carmen, and she's the conservative, mostly in the classical "keep the government small because you can't trust it" sense. The coyote is Winslow, and he's whatever liberal stereotype the cartoonist needs at the moment, though the stereotyping is no where near as infantile as in Mallard Fillmore). I may not often agree with the views he's presenting, but at least he's being funny when he's presenting them. And I'll acknowledge that he's made me examine the logic behind my own views a few times, and I'll respect any conservative who can make me think something beyond "wow, you're an idiot." MDB (talk) 11:06, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Is this the same the Prickly City that a few months back depicted Boomers as an aging fat hippie wearing a diaper and putting a strain on social security by refusing to die? Vulpius (talk) 11:54, 6 May 2010(UTC)
 * If it did, I may re-evaluate my opinion. On the other paw, if a good satirist doesn't eventually offend everyone, he's failing at his job. MDB (talk) 12:15, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Mallard Fillmore is not funny. It's just simple polemics.  At least Bloom County and Calvin & Hobbes were complex, had no sacred goats and could be enjoyed by anyone anywhere on the political spectrum. Secret Squirrel (talk) 16:22, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Bloom County just had sacred penguins. "Hello, I'm Boy George." "Hello, I'm Penguin Opus!" MDB (talk) 16:35, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Secularism debate
BBC Parliament (freeview 81) House of lords - on till 4:40. (I am a person not a template) 14:19, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Fuck you Susan. I've got other things to be doing without you coming round and diverting my attention. :) 14:25, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Also here on t'web No fuckin' subtitles! TerrySmall.png [[Image:Toast s.png|alt=Toast|text-bottom|20px|link=User talk:SusanG]] 14:29, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * On a positive note, it's nice to be reminded that the machine of government is still continuing despite the election ballyhoo. 14:35, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * What a shame there are so few people present. 14:37, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I gather it's preaching to the converted. Although there was apparently a bit of snide about Tony Blair a while ago. TerrySmall.png [[Image:Toast s.png|alt=Toast|text-bottom|20px|link=User talk:SusanG]] 14:39, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I loved the story that Lord Graham of Edmonton just told. Although a humanist, he was invited to a "happy clappy" church by a west-Indian waitress at the House of Commons. During the service she told him to wait outside then marched in and said "All rise, here comes the Lord".  14:43, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

"Rationalist" Anthem
Pretty sweet song, pretty creative video, features a ton of our favorite (and least favorite) people!The Foxhole Atheist (talk) 23:34, 6 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Nice indeed. 01:15, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

While all the Limeys are glued to the telly, awaiting election results, we yanks are at the bar, getting drunk
Who's joining me? DickTurpis (talk) 01:32, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I would have had a drink in their honor, until I realized that the British have shit drinks compared to the continent. So I opened a bottle of Portuguese port instead.  I did toast the Lib Dems, though.  -- 01:41, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm glued to the election, and getting drunk. On a nice bottle of Polish vodka I liberated from the continent a few years ago. Bondurant (talk) 01:44, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Them's fightin' words! Yer gonna take some overly sweet-ass Iberian wine over cask ale or single malt whisky? DickTurpis (talk) 01:46, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I am with you Turpis. Acei9 01:47, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm listening online and also getting a wee bit drunk. However, it's now 3am and I can't be fucked anymore. I'm going to bed. 02:03, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Hell no. Sounds like prime Skype time to me. DickTurpis (talk) 02:06, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Indeed. Surely drinking british Ale and scottish Whisky counts as "following the polls avidly"?   02:16, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Which reminds me: Human, I've taken your place for tonight as obsessive northeastern American liveblogger. 02:21, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I forgot to "watch" that when it was posted. Glad you stepped into the breach!  03:17, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Fuck, I got mentioned in the lead? Damn.  03:18, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Truth be told, I'm drinking wine right now. But I could switch to Scotch at any time. Hell, when the Scottish National Party gets on the big board, I'll pour meself a dram. DickTurpis (talk) 02:22, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Curse You, Terry Pratchett
You've turned me into the weird guy who laughs out loud on the subway.

The most recent was:

"Ursery?"

"No, Mr. Lipwig. That would be cruelty to bears. This is usury."

MDB (talk) 15:02, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, good ol' Pratchett. By the way, for all those with access to Sky One, there will be an adaptation of Going Postal at the end of May.-- 15:18, 6 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Are the filmed versions worthwhile? I've seen them available at amazon.com.


 * I'm definitely looking forward to reading "Where's My Cow?" to my niece when she visits this summer. MDB (talk) 15:39, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The Hogfather miniseries is good and relatively true to the source (and has a wicked Teatime). The Colour of Magic, not so much (guess which offensive stereotype has been changed to a slightly less offensive one). --ZooGuard (talk) 15:58, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I've never cared much for the adaptations. Most of the humour is lost because it's in the wording and narrative rather than the dialog. I'm still playing Discworld 2 on my phone. I like that there's a character in the middle-eastern land called D'Blah who tries to sell you stuff, and he's cutting his own hands off with those prices. 16:01, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * IMHO very (very very) few film adaptations of good books match up to the written word. LOTR is probably an exception to this rule. TerrySmall.png [[Image:Toast s.png|alt=Toast|text-bottom|20px|link=User talk:SusanG]] 16:10, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Another exception is The Princess Bride. It is almost certainly helped by the fact the author, William Goldman, was an accomplished screenwriter when he wrote the novel, and then wrote the screenplay based on the novel.


 * "Mawwiage. That bwethed inthtituthun, that dweem within a dweem..." MDB (talk) 16:14, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * (EC) How about The Last Unicorn, very good adaption straight from the novel. "There are no happy endings, because nothing ends." --Kels (talk) 17:10, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Dragging it back to Pratchett adaptations, I know that myself and a lot of fans would love to see the City Watch series adapted for TV/Film, and there has been a lot of discussion about who should play whom. So far I've got:


 * Vimes= Pete Postlethwaite, Alun Armstrong, Peter Guinness.
 * Cecil Wormsborough St. John 'Nobby' Nobbs= Nicholas Tennant. The one on the right, played Nobbs in the Hogfather.
 * Fred 'Fatty' Colon= Cliff Parisi.
 * Carrot Ironfoundersson= No idea. You need somebody who has the same build as Superman and can act, so I'ld probably go with Brandon Routh, assuming you could teach him the accent.
 * Angua= Ingrid Bolsø Berdal. She's in the Going Postal adaptation, so let's see how she goes.
 * Detritus= CGI.
 * Cheri Littlebottom= No idea.
 * Lord Havelock Vetinari= Zachary Quinto (if the man can play Spock, he can play Vetinari), Alan Rickman, Jeremy Irons. (If you need a link to the last two then shame on you).
 * 'CMOT' Dibbler= Perry Fenwick.

-- 17:08, 6 May 2010 (UTC)


 * ". . . assuming you could teach him the accent." So do we know what a Ramtops accent should sound like?  17:43, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, Carrot was brought up by the Dwarves, so technically I suppose it's going to be the traditional hybrid Welsh/Scottish/Whatthefuckisthat accent one gets in such situations.-- 18:01, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Lancre I've always thought of as broad Yorkshire accent. Uberwold, Klatch, Djelibebi (still my fave TP made-up name) accents all pretty self-explanatory. -- PsyGremlin  18:41, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I've always thought of Lancre as a West Country/Hampshire/Dorset accent, what with the scumble and all.-- 23:09, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Lancre is quite clearly Lancaster and, in particular, Pendle. He's quite big on the Pendle witches (see also Good Omens). Bob Soles (talk) 12:33, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

How do the filmed adaptations handle Pratchett's footnotes? They're some of the funniest things in the books. MDB (talk) 17:23, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, the narrator did some of them in The Colour of Magic and The Light Fantastic. I don't seem to remember any footnotes in Going Postal though.-- 17:34, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Took the words from my mouth. Must admit, Hogfather was better than CoM (although Tim Curry steals the show, and Jeremy Irons as the Patrician was a masterstroke). The actor who played Nobs was very good, as was Ridcully. @SD - there's only one patrician - Jeremy Irons.
 * At least nobody's tried to put Jasper Fforde's stuff on screen, because that would be a disaster. -- PsyGremlin  17:42, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Wasn't there talk of a filmed adaptation of Gaiman and Pratchett's Good Omens a few years back? That could be quite amusing. MDB (talk) 11:09, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Prepare to be gobsmacked.
Quite simply the best thing you're ever going to see on YouTube.-- PsyGremlin  19:18, 6 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Welcome to three years ago. But seriously, that is an amazing video. Keegscee (talk) 20:07, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I had never seen it before myself, but it was very facinating to watch. I do wonder if the calf lived long term, but even if it died, the lion's hunt was disrupted and possibly made them weaker, which would be a win for the herd.  The croc joining in was a bit amusing, though. -Ravenhull (talk) 20:31, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Man, such drama. If the buffaloes weren't staunch vegetarians they could have chowed down on lion that night at the rate they were going.  They almost looked like they didn't know they could actually do the lion toss, though.  Interesting. Like the opening of 2001 without the ability to learn.  00:53, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I believe that this was the most watched on YouTube in 2007. For some reason it reminds me of yesterday's election. 11:17, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Standardising our side-by-side articles
We've quite a few side-by-side articles written using varying formats. I'm tempted to reformat all of the non-essay side-by-side articles to have them using a single style of layout. It'll make them easier to maintain and it's a more consistent experience for readers. Can anyone see problems with my applying RationalWiki:Side-by-Side_Template to these articles? --Ask me about our Angel 10:10, 7 May 2010 (UTC)


 * None whatsoever. In fact, it occurred to me too that it would be the obvious thing to do, for editability as well. (Even though personally, I hate the side-by-side format) - David Gerard (talk) 10:14, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, good point. I might just turn this in to an overall review of the articles to see if some are better handled in a more conventional format. I like side-by-side for being able to quickly navigate a long list of points and rebuttals. It's a nice visual thing. --[[Image:Concrnedresident logo.png|140px|link=User:Concernedresident|Concernedresident|baseline]]Ask me about our wizard 10:27, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It's also good for quoting the entirety of something we are refuting, allowing us to critique it bit by bit. And as far as the template, go ahead (it's not actually a template so much as an easy place to copy the formatting from).  The reason they vary is people were creating them while the "final" format was still being developed.  19:27, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Sweet balls!
I dunno how I did it, but I MANAGED TO PASS FIRST YEAR ANIMATION! By the skin of my teeth (Drawing and Design, I got in the 57-59% range), but I'm a-goin' on to second year all the same! Now I just need to find work for the summer, and start building on my skills on my own time for four months. --Kels (talk) 13:41, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * We never doubted you, Kels. Congratulations[[image:Party.gif]] TerrySmall.png [[Image:Toast s.png|alt=Toast|text-bottom|20px|link=User talk:SusanG]] 13:57, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Well done Kelseigh. I'm essentially in the exact same position as you! Is your course 3 years undergrad? 18:58, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Technically, yeah. But all the basic concepts are taught in two years, the third is for doing a student film.  So a lot of people get hired right after second year and either don't bother getting the piece of paper (nobody really cares about it in the industry, nor about GPAs), or come back and do it later.  Some work and just come back for a few courses part-time in third year too. --Kels (talk) 02:55, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * You're ruining your cred by passing. Art school graduate just doesn't have the same cachet as art school dropout. -- 21:59, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Good point. I've never heard of successful graduate, but the world abounds with highly successful dropouts.  Of course, she hasn't graduated yet.  Anyway, w00t!  23:23, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Gonna be a while before graduating happens. Besides, this isn't a hoity-toity art school, this is a career college.  I'm just looking for a career in art, is all. --Kels (talk) 02:55, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Have you considered learning to play guitar? It's so much more fulfilling than invading Poland.  03:34, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

You know who else was an art school dropout? Hitler. I guess this means that Kels isn't Hitler.... Somebody should tell Ken. -- 23:35, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * You know who else wasn't Hitler? Stalin, that's who! --Kels (talk) 02:55, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Congrats Kels. :-) --BobSpring is sprung! 11:44, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Belated congrats Kels... Šţěŗĭļė 03:23, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Beer recommendations
My tipple of choice is a pint of Wife Beater, and if I can't get that I go for the other export strength lagers like Grolsch or Kronenbourg. (If I don't feel like lager I do enjoy a nice pint of Guinness) Now then, I do get quite bad heartburn, and a few mates have advised that I move away from the lagers as these are quite sharp and acidic. I've been enjoying the Guinness more of late, but I am now considering becoming a Real Ale Twat, so any advice? 17:40, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Do you have any smaller breweries near you? Or more importantly pubs that sell them? Some of the mass produced stuff is as bad as the mass produced lagers. And UK Stella is shit compared to the real stuff they sell on the contnint. Ajkgordon (talk) 18:39, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I've only tried to Stella here (UK) and it's pretty horrible. My tipple is Carlsberg. Lovely, wet, bubbly, gaseous, sopping arsehole beer. Fosters isn't as bad as everyone makes out, but it's not great. Guinness is nice and rich. I sank quite a few of them on St Patrick's Day this year. DS, if you're actually looking for a non-beer based drink, try something like vodka and coke. That's what my mate drinks and he's not gay at all. 18:53, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Alcohol can aggravate heartburn so go for something with lower alchol and not too acid - so forget the spirits and/or coke. Why not try a real-ale mild? As for recommendations it's really what is available in your area as the best beers tend to be produced by small breweries. You'll probably feel better after drinking real-ale as you don't get all gassed up from that keg lager. 19:01, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Whereabouts do you live? If in London, swing by the Pembury Tavern. It's a real ale pub run by a Cambridge computer scientist who decided selling beer would be more fun. Free wifi and lots of geeks, particularly on Sunday (games night) - David Gerard (talk) 19:05, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * You can't be a real ale twat if they sell it in a supermarket, so I recommend Bombardier. -- 19:28, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Ale is where it's at. My favourites are the darker ales like Hobgoblin, Adnams Broadside or Theakston's Old Peculier.  But since you're coming at it from a lager direction, you might prefer lighter ones like Badger Golden Glory (or Golden Champion, Tanglefoot, most Badger Ales in fact), Spitfire, IPAs, etc.  These are all ones you can find bottled in most UK supermarkets, so my advice if you're just branching out into ales, is to start there & sample a few different kinds of ale that way.  In pubs, the ales on tap are often obscure local or speciality ones, so you tend to have to pick one at random & hope for the best or ask the bar staff for a recommendation (although they're often clueless).  This is half the fun of real ales, but it helps to do some homework so you get to know what kinds of ale you like best (e.g. dark/light, weak/strong, fruity/malty/hoppy/bitter, etc.)  There are also some great flavoured ales which are worth checking out, like Badger's Blandford Fly (made with ginger), Poacher's Choice (with licorice), and the Banana Bread Beer.   19:38, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * When I lived in the UK I drank some wonderful ales. Don't bother with the watery piss like Stella and Carlsburg. Fucking awful shit. Acei9 19:46, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Natural Light. It's cheap, light, smooth, crisp, refreshing, delicious, less filling and cheap. Been my fave since Jr high. &mdash; Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 19:47, 7 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I second this disgust. I didn't move to the UK after seventeen years of Australian piss lager to drink British piss lager. For supermarket sampling, try Asda, their real ale twat range is surprisingly good - David Gerard (talk) 20:04, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * At the risk of invoking CUR, may i recommend an otter? Totnesmartin (talk) 20:29, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * My advice is hit the pubs. Try a different cask ale every time until you've tried them all. DickTurpis (talk) 00:19, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * What, no Guinness.gif? TerrySmall.png [[Image:Toast s.png|alt=Toast|text-bottom|20px|link=User talk:SusanG]] 03:04, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd agree with Dick. Also if there is a CAMRA festival near you, then attend it. Old Speckled Hen is widely available and is a good introduction into quality beer for lager drinkers. CS Miller (talk) 11:21, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah! Real Ale. How I miss it.  :-( The best beer I can find here is Voll Damn - a bit on the strong side, but loaded with flavour.--BobSpring is sprung! 11:42, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Sod the ale, bring on the scrumpy and decent cider. There's nothing like a nice cloudy, still pint of Old Rosie, unless it's another pint.-- 14:50, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Don't you find scrumpy hangovers to be dreadful?--BobSpring is sprung! 15:36, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I got this cool Whiskey bottle at a yard sale the other week. Nikka Whiskey from Japan with metal samurai armor to cover the bottle. It also said it was 86 proof too.I guess the samurai could hold their booze.--Thanatos (talk) 16:48, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Nope. Never had a hangover from a properly brewed pint of scrumpy or cider, only ever from the mass-produced acidic crap that the big breweries like to pass off as cider.-- 17:02, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm amazed. Some of the most memorable hangovers of my life were generated by the really cloudy locally-produced stuff.--BobSpring is sprung! 18:06, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

What the shitting Christ?
I have actually been surprised by a new kind showing up in the baraminology of woo. Ladeez gemmun: horse placenta as sports medicine. - David Gerard (talk) 20:07, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Meh. That's sooooooooo 2009....... --84.220.118.103 (talk) 20:19, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Premarin has long been made from pregnant mare's urine. --Kels (talk) 14:20, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Phony Pharaoh sells up
Mohammed Al Fayed sells Harrods. For those who aren't PrivateEyeaholics, Mohammed Al Fayed has been a "colourfull" element of British life for a number of years. There's a bit about him on WP but not a lot, prolly 'cause he's rather litigious. 11:06, 8 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Fuggin' hell! –SuspectedReplicant retire me 11:39, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Dad's a Birther.
FML. 12:44, 6 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Have you seen his long form birth certificate? - David Gerard (talk) 13:22, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Quick! Dad says "He lost right to this Countryth (sic) when his mother left in the 60's to claim Indonesia as there (sic) Country." Refutation pl0x? 18:39, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Fuck the other Wiki we have it here. Although if you must use the other wiki the relevant case is Perkins v. Elg, which ruled that the citizenship chosen by the parents in your minority does not effect your natural American citizenship if you choose that in your majority. 02:10, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * "Dad, please tell me Mom was sleeping around nine months before I was born."
 * Though before you get to that one, you can try the other wiki for what the Supreme Goddamn Court of the United States says. Just to reassure yourself that facts are pointless - David Gerard (talk) 19:01, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I believe that, at large, once you're a birther, you're always a birther. If he's willing to believe that the conspiracy stretches from 1961 newspapers to the present-day Hawaii Health Director, there's nothing you can do but trot out his ignorance like we do with everyone else. If you don't want to do that to your dad, avoid the subject. &mdash; Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 19:19, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * One thing that annoys me with "birthers" is how quickly they are quick to gloss over the "democratically elected by a fuckton of Americans" human, in the hope of "invalidating" someone from an (imaginary) technically. Frankly if a "foreigner" can go through all the party processes, up to the top of the leadership, while beating and life-long and experienced candidates (eg Hillary) then he deserves to be president. Let's see said Birthers do that. Sen (talk) 19:40, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The part I've always loved about the whole Birther thing is that it implies that the federal governmental agencies were in on it prior to the election. Lets face it, do you think if there were any chance of this being true, Bush would have ordered the AG to have the FBI and every other federal agency with an interest to look into this.  Which means that Dub was in on the conspiracy... -Ravenhull (talk) 21:21, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * One of those "questions the birthers can't decently answer" is "why didn't the McCain campaign make an issue of this?" Okay, well, for McCain, I suppose you could say there's a vague question about his natural born status (he was born in Panama), so he didn't want the issue raised at all, but then why didn't Hillary Clinton's campaign make an issue of it? She ran a no-holds-barred race, and the allegations were out there during the primaries, but. then as now, it was only kooks and crackpots attempting to make it an issue.
 * My pet theory is that this is ultimately an attempt to create a version of the rumors about Clinton's extramarital affairs (with the exception that Bill Clinton really was a him-bo). It's something to keep the talk radio base riled up for four (or eight) years because they'll always be able to find some way to keep raising the issue. Even if Obama did produce the sacred 'long form' (and I've seen varying accounts as to whether such a thing really exists), even if every hospital staffer from the attending obstetrician to the nurses who monitored him in the maternity ward to the clerk who admitted his mama to the janitor who mopped up after he spit up on the floor testified in court and on Fox News "yeah, I was there in Honolulu when Barack Hussein (Oh my god he's a secret Muslim!) Obama was born", even if Orly Taitz herself said, "listen up, fuckwits, this is all a scam I've been running to make conservatives look like shitheads, and you fell for it 110%", they'd still keep flogging this issue, because it keeps the base angry, and practically all the American right has left is anger. MDB (talk) 11:07, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

The whole movement is the same as Obama is a secret Muslim thing. It only exists as an issue because the right knows that it will keep the loons voting for them rather than Obama. Mr. Swift (talk) 22:52, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

PalMD, of the great lakes, whom God preserve ...
... has a nice article on Smallpox that illuminates the attitudes of the anti-vaccers of today. 03:49, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Nice! Pal always delivers the goods. 13:32, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, very nice. It's unsurprising that people have always been wary of vaccination, it seems so counter intuitive to intentionally infect (yes, I know this is a horrendous simplification) someone with a virus to protect them. But hey, it works, smallpox is one of the best examples by far. It's also very interesting that antif vaccination arguments haven't changed, Cantwell sounds pretty much identical to Jenny McCarthy. It's kinda sad that arguments from woo-meisters don't change or evolve or adapt, it really makes it too easy for us... 01:14, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Some random screed...

 * Moved to Forum:Get over it... 14:38, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

On missionish cracked.com article
Not as addictive as Trope, but close. 14:35, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Huh. Surprisingly flat article, given the subject matter. X Stickman (talk) 16:47, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I already knew alot of those. Still, even cracked articles about stuff I already know are usually pretty good.  I love that site!--Mustex (talk) 15:56, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

I Lenski'd a guy today
He thinks tanning is an example of evolution. Seriously! Sometimes I think the human race is 2 dumb 2 survive. Wodewick Welease Wodewick! 17:52, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * A very well-worded argument. I wonder what Nate will say in return. 19:08, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * This post has taken a well deserved retirement. God bless!
 * Oh well. Now at least he knows about Jesus Gregor Mendel. I hope his heart turns to God Wikipedia someday. Nate, I'll be praying for you watching carefully to see if you ever dare post about science again. Wodewick Welease Wodewick!  21:29, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Cripes I'm getting PJR flashbacks. It's nice that he thinks evolution is not philosophically viable, in the same post where he makes it clear he doesn't know the first thing about it.  But he sounds so reasonable, doesn't he? --Kels (talk) 23:21, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Wow. "I need to study my biology a bit more." understatement of the week award?  00:38, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Too bad he closed the comments on this. We could have had a field day. 00:41, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Shame, because that seems like an interesting topic. Whenever you talk about something being an "atheist bible" it's never really deserving of the term - "bible" being used to describe something that is a core, authoritive text on the subject and a metaphor/simile type thing. Atkins being the "bible" of physical chemistry to a student, for instance. But there aren't any books deserving of the acolade of "bible". However, I think your guy here is proposing an atheist bible that uses the phrase far more literally, and I don't think such a thing could ever exist, because there isn't a set out story that is needed to describe disbelief. You can record the history and background of the thinking behind atheism, but there isn't any "required reading". Anyway, that's just me fluffing on... 00:57, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * For me, the absurd part is his conclusion. He realizes that the idea of an "atheist bible" is a contradiction, but for entirely the wrong reasons. He then goes on to conclude that because atheists have to figure things out on their own and can never be 100% successful at doing so, everything degenerates into meaningless relativism as far as they are concerned. Yikes. 01:03, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Ray Comfort sent me my copy for free. 01:11, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Interesting post. While sometimes he almost drifts into lunacy, each time he pulls back from the brink and writes some more relatively sensible things. Yeah, his final conclusion does not follow from anything he wrote, but I'll ignore that since he already had the conclusion before he started.

But, on to his question. To be fair, I think the "atheist [concordance]" (AB hereinafter) should be allowed, as the Bible is, to contain many different sorts of writing by many authors. Since the Bible does not contain "all knowledge" even from when it was written (no recipes, no instructions on making pottery or milking goats, etc.) the AB would not need to fill it's "Genesis" with all known astrophysics, biology, archaeology, etc. It could be "brief" in its history of time. It could contain many well received "wise books", some perhaps reduced to more concise versions. It could have sections discussing ethics, and some bawdy poetry.

Most importantly, there would be different versions of it. Some people or groups would leave out or include different works than others. There would not be a concrete "decided" interpretation, even, of what a lot of it means. And, since atheists are human just like believers, there'd be plenty of idiots misquoting it, misusing it, and even being mislead by it.

Should we try to piece together an article on this guy's site? 01:30, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * As athiesm isn't a coordinated set of beliefs, it's difficult to imagine an atheist bible. It's almost like asking for an "atheist God".  I suppose a humanist bible could be proposed though. --BobSpring is sprung! 07:34, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Huh. Looks like he didn't just dodge out on debate close comments for just that one entry, he closed it for all of them. --Kels (talk) 14:16, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Sometimes people just want to put stuff out there and don't want a debate, so I wouldn't blame them for closing comments. Kind of like when I post something controversial on Facebook and get 40+ messages of tl;dr that I just ignore anyway. 14:30, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Copyright law
Could one of the lawyer types here tell me if it is legal to send someone your copy of some software if you have not activated it and erase it from your computer afterwards? 17:56, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I think you need a few more details, like: Did you pay money for it or was it a free sample? If you paid money for it were there a limited number of licences? What conditions about re-distribution were included with the software? Did you accept the conditions?  Even with the answers to these questions I personally wouldn't know the answer - but I think they would clarify the question. --BobSpring is sprung! 18:03, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * From a practical and moral perspective, I think it's fine. If you pass some software onto someone and then delete your version, it's pretty much the same as you installing it on a new computer, which you're certainly entitled to do. The exact legalities of re-saling things or just giving them away is probably more complex and arsy. Software is a little wierd when it comes to it, because what you're really paying for is a license to use it, hence why it's technically legal to download an iso file of Windows XP (Microsoft explicity do not and never have distributed it online) and use a genuine product key to activiate it, but it's frowned upon. 22:01, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * What country are you in? In all EU member countries, you own the copy of the software you have; once you delete it from your PC, you can give/sell the install discs to anyone you want to, as long as you give any backups of the installer along with the original, or delete them as well. This is just like a book/video/cd, its yours to do with as you wish. CS Miller (talk) 22:43, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

This makes me think of one broad exception to this, which is copies of windows on OEM machines. The key "belongs" to the machine, and was bought for that machine by the OEM. For instance, I wan ted to start this used lappie from scratch, and eventually realized I had to use the correct OEM XP Media Center disc. Then there was no need to enter the key - the machine knows it already. This may also be vaguely true of other pre-installed software. But obviously not the case with software you buy separately. 23:20, 8 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Actually no, it is not yours to do with as you please. And you don't even own a copy of the software - you own a licence to use it and you must only use it as described by the conditions of the licence.
 * If your software is a retail version, then generally you can uninstall it from your machine and give/sell it to another person. If it's OEM, then you can't. Then you've got all the other restrictions like activation, upgrade versions, and so on. Best thing is to simply ask the vendor. Ajkgordon (talk) 08:23, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

David Gerard for bureaucrat
As Human has 'cratted him without a vote, I am putting it to a vote here per procedure.
 * We should really be doing this kind of thing on a separate page. -- Nx  / talk 19:30, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The existing instructions say here.--BobSpring is sprung! 19:36, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I know, but it's bad for archival and other reasons. Since the only way to get something done here is to do it yourself, I'm going to move this to RationalWiki:Bureaucrat nominations unless someone objects. (announcing a vote on the saloon bar is obviously still a good idea) -- Nx  / talk 19:39, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I have no objection - but lets change the instructions.--BobSpring is sprung! 19:40, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Moved to RationalWiki:Bureaucrat nominations -- Nx  / talk 19:46, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Note to anyone who thinks this is too much like Wikipedia and is ruining the wiki: we already had voting for crats, I merely moved it to a separate page for entirely technical reasons. -- Nx  / talk 20:09, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Poll
Or we can use the poll thing.

 Yea Nay


 * Not if you want reliable results. -- Nx  / talk 19:34, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * we can't rely on the magic technology?--BobSpring is sprung! 19:38, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * No, anonymous internet polls are basically useless, see Stephen Colbert bridge -- Nx  / talk 19:41, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I thought you had to be a member to vote? It it open to IP's as well?--BobSpring is sprung! 19:43, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, but it would be even easier to abuse using socks. -- Nx  / talk 19:53, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry if I'm being dim Nx :-( but you are saying "yes" to which question?--BobSpring is sprung! 19:56, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * No, I'm being dim :) The second one, it's open to IPs, and even if you are a registered user it records your IP (so that if you log out and vote again it doesn't get recorded separately). -- Nx  / talk 19:59, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I regularly flit between about 6 different computers across home and work, by IPs (the WIGOs) I get 6 votes. There's no way to really make it fraud proof with those polls and up/down vote things. 21:57, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, bitch, who votes seven times???? 07:32, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I just said I could [[image:Blush.gif]]... 14:31, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Volvo Facepalm
Oh shit it's not going to stop, is it, oh God no please no. DogP Marmite Patrol 19:58, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Awww. I almost feel bad for them. 00:42, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Better link to video. 08:02, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The guy with the mic who doesn't know quite what to say is pretty funny. Reminds me of contestants on Dragons' Den trying to keep up their sales pitch when their prototype malfunctions.  14:58, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Wow, I'd usually see this on my silly Audi mailing list. More and more, bigger and better, larger and stronger, RW brings me the news I am interested in or amused by.  03:04, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Quick link to TVTropes possible?
I submit that we have a chance for increased lulz if we had a quick link notation for TVTropes in the manner of wp: and cp: EVDebs (talk) 21:33, 7 May 2010 (UTC)


 * NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. IT'S THE TARPIT OF THE INTERNET. Yeah, probably a good idea. Are interwiki links set up in the Mediawiki: namespace? - David Gerard (talk) 21:37, 7 May 2010 (UTC)


 * No, it requires an arcane ritual and goat sacrifice to the Gods of the wiki.
 * Anyway, because their namespaces are set up stupidly, you can only access the main namespace this way, e.g. StarTrek (note camelcase instead of _ to indicate where spaces should be, another stupid feature of the wiki software they are using) takes you to Main/StarTrek, but you can't link to Film/StarTrek. I can set it up to not add the main namespace prefix to the link, so you'd have to add it yourself (e.g. Main/ArsonMurderAndJaywalking ) but I think that would make it too complicated and noone's going to use it (not that I envision many people will use it regardless since it's just easier to copypaste the URL) -- Nx  / talk 21:57, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Just out of curiosity, why do we want this? 23:26, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Indeed, it would be very, very cruel to send someone there. Once you start, it's impossible to stop. 23:54, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * In order to facilitate the injection of greater lulz into pages that are entirely too serious. EVDebs (talk) 00:29, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * So in order to get more lulz in our articles, we'd link to other people's lulz? Why don't we make it more straightforward and just steal the stuff? Vulpius (talk) 00:36, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Damn you. I just looked for "Rationalwiki" there. That was two hours ago - David Gerard (talk) 01:47, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Hehe. 02:11, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Huh, RW really does have its own article there... *click* ... *click* ... *click* *click* ...HEEEEEEEEEEEEELP! --Sid (talk) 18:00, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Two hours? that was quick. Totnesmartin (talk) 22:08, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * For the serious record, I don't think we need to rig up a quick linking system to TV Tropes. The WP one is useful because that's the standard repository for crap that is outside RW's remit, and the CP oneis there because of the sheer amount of Conservapedia based crap that we tolerate host here. I don't think there's anything we'd want to link to at TVTropes, as anything there that's on RW's mission, RW should already have, and usually does a little better. 01:21, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Oh phooey. Someone didn't like part of my last edit (look for the edit from StudiodeKadent). EVDebs (talk) 23:19, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * You need to EDIT WAR FURIOUSLY, with CITATIONS to show the OBVIOUS CORRECTNESS of your position - David Gerard (talk) 23:24, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm holding a piece of chicken hostage!
Hoping someone else finds this funny, I made it to a vegetarian: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJLVFJf9dt8 --Mustex (talk) 15:51, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Nice link, you fool. 15:52, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Link fixed, I feel dumb.--Mustex (talk) 16:03, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Hilarious. I'm sure he'll appreciate it. Maybe next time you should go to the NAACP and tell them if they don't do the same thing you'll kill a black guy. 16:20, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * You sound like a Vasudan (well, their translator anyway). -- Nx  / talk 16:20, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * WHAT WOULD TOMMOORE SAY?????? -- 16:42, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * He would say this goes on the long, long list of Mustex videos I haven't watched. And judging from subscriber counts, I'm in a big club in that regard.-- 02:16, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd like to know where CUR stands on this issue. --Kels (talk) 19:25, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I think the NAACP thing would only be funny if I had a black guy on screen with me, and the joke was that he was volunteering to be kicked, and if they paid up would split the money with me. I was, however, thinking of threatening to open a door for a woman unless Nuclearnight gave into my demands.--76.18.115.64 (talk) 20:12, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * You should try telling a joke and seeing if anyone lolz before attempting deep structured humor. Sorry if that sounds harsh, but, dude, you aren't funny.  OK, as far as I can see.  You might be the life of the party IRL, and I hope you are.  02:18, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Argh, I gave in to boredom and watched. I am honestly embarrassed for you.  Oh well. "This is a joke" is something one should never have to type.  03:44, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Only typed it because someone said there was a risk it might be flagged. Either way, it got me three subscribers, so clearly someone thought it was funny. :) --76.18.115.64 (talk) 11:15, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, that's cool, then. Congratulations!  20:53, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Meh, imho that's a dick move
It's his blog so he can do whatever he wants. AND, I probably provoked him into baleeting my comment when I started directing hits to his blog from this obviously godless site.

But I think it's kind of a dick move to delete the post and my comment, then repost everything and pretend nobody ever went "Wait r u srs lol?"

It makes me wonder why he hasn't yet got around to scrubbing this post which also generated a fair number of "I read this blog for the laughs but this time you've outdone yourself" posts. Check out his posts on logic... or what passes for logic at Dallas Theological Seminary. For you non-Murikans that's basically the heart of dispensationalism in the USA.

Since he has decided to reupload his embarrassingly science-illiterate post I will reupload my embarrassingly well-researched reply. WodewickWelease Wodewick!


 * In case you haven't seen it, his "tanning is micro-evolution!" nonsense also appears in this entry. --Kels (talk) 02:07, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that's the post I replied to (which he deleted and reposted). Wodewick Welease Wodewick! 02:29, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah, okay. I thought you meant the Evolving Down By the Pool one, where he uses the same argument.  --Kels (talk) 02:53, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

HOLD IT RIGHT THERE!
Wodewick, you MUST see this. 01:48, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * PJR? Is that you? --Kels (talk) 01:58, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I posted a comment, which is "awaiting moderation." I will be interested to see his reply, if he provides one. 02:20, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

D'oh!
I upped his traffic? You mean his blog isn't really a "nexus" in Christian thought and practice? ;)

I'm not gonna reply to his post, I feel I've already screwed with him too much. If we keep making fun of him he might don a Batman costume and start filing DMCAs against RationalWiki.

It was very inappropriate for me to boast about "pwning" him on this site BEFORE he had a chance to reply to my comment. My bad. This probably and understandably made him feel antagonized and was contrary to the more fact-based tone of my comment to his blog. I find that when people make fun of my errors I too am less likely to accept their good-faith corrections.

However I think his decision to delete my post and pretend his comments about tanning were "tongue in cheek" says all that needs to be said about his openness to discussion.

If I wrote to his blog again I would just say, choose one:


 * 1. Study science from non-apologetic sources before posting science discussions again.
 * 2. Sign up for Conservapedia, they're looking for people like you.

Seeing this guy interact with Andy would actually be pretty awesome. But I would feel some social-responsibility pangs. It would be like introducing two Idaho militiamen to each other - God knows the kinds of pipe bombs they could build together! <font style="font-family: Papyrus"><font color="#FF0000">Wodewick <font color="#800080">Welease Wodewick! 03:40, 10 May 2010 (UTC)


 * As to the last, I just refer back to the original Illuminati from Steve Jackson Games. Weird groups always oppose each other. --Kels (talk) 04:06, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Looks like he restored the post with my comment, and refrained from deleting Tet's. Good for him. <font style="font-family: Papyrus"><font color="#FF0000">Wodewick <font color="#800080">Welease Wodewick! 15:27, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * He seems like a nice guy. I'm considering critiquing some of his work, especially the "Atheist's Bible" thing. 16:10, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Happy Mother's Day!
Now what the hell are you doing on RationalWiki on Mother's Day? Go spend time with your mom(s)! 17:49, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Well mine in jail... unless you know how to break into jail, i don't think i will be able to see her.Waronstupidity (talk) 17:57, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * That was weeks ago! March 14 to be exact. Totnesmartin (talk) 18:17, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that was a long time ago. Got my dear ol' Mum&hellip;nothing, on account of her being in France and me not knowing where she was or when she was getting back.-- 18:22, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Nobody is allowed to celebrate it. One of them there Pagan holidays. -Ravenhull (talk) 18:35, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, sweet FSM, I thought the Examiner was just right wing before. I had no idea it went into crackpot fundamentalism. MDB (talk) 11:15, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Same here, I didn't know they delved into stuff like that. Granted, it's an opinion piece, but wow... 19:46, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Pot trying to become kettle
Tea Party leader says Teabagger is the same as the N word.--Thanatos (talk) 18:34, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I spent some time watching random teabagger vids on utube last night. Now, I started by chasing the ones that set out to make them look ridiculous (from this bookmark), and of course they did.  But since utube pulls up all manner of related links, eventually I was watching "tea party" vids rather than "teabagger" ones, that is, neutral or pro-teabagger ones.  You know what?  Even the most pro vids made them look like blithering idiots...  21:38, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I've had three people recently call me homophobic brcause I refer to them as Teabaggers. It was fun, I made the first guy look like an idiot.  21:58, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It's more considerate to label them fucking morons. I suspect that their teabagger comrades repeatedly trying to dump tea bags in strange places, as by way of a protest, could explain the teabagger name. Yup, blithering idiots. --[[Image:Concrnedresident logo.png|140px|link=User:Concernedresident|Concernedresident|baseline]]Ask me about our deity of personal preference 22:40, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * They would know, wouldn't they?
 * I mean you guys are putting this on the Internet yourselves.
 * Voluntarily!
 * This woman is not hypnotized, drunk, or paid. Consider that.
 * Fucking morons. <font style="font-family: Papyrus"><font color="#FF0000">Wodewick <font color="#800080">Welease Wodewick! 01:52, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Whoah, that's a serious amount of crazy to digest in one morning. There's a lot to be said for allowing idiots to speak, since in cases like this there's just no need for us to criticise what they're doing or saying. They're pretty good at digging holes. I suppose the only problem we have to look for is in wrongly accusing people of being racist. Sure some of the wingnut brigade appear to miss the days when coloured folks knew their place, but many are likely just uninformed idiots being swept up in the media machine hysteria. --[[Image:Concrnedresident logo.png|140px|link=User:Concernedresident|Concernedresident|baseline]]Ask me about our governor 10:21, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Added "pro-ana" to the to-do list
Just wanted everyone to know that I added it, and feel its one of the most glaring omissions from this site. At the same time, however, I think that its important enough that the article should be written by someone with some real medical knowledge, not me. For those of you who don't know "pro-ana" means "pro-anorexia."--76.18.115.64 (talk) 20:14, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * not a single useful link here or there to help us do your bidding? 03:31, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I think Wikipedia's pretty much got it covered. What would you suggest we say that they dont', other than "it's stupid"? 03:38, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It's an interesting area, but very specific and specialised to describe as a "glaring" omission. Apart from a few friends who are recovering from anorexia and have done some fairly lightweight awareness and campaigning against pro-ana, I have no idea about it and couldn't really write much from an RW perspective. 08:31, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * K, you want links: http://www.prettythin.com/ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0HCagGjyTY  --76.18.115.64 (talk) 11:12, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Put them at the todo list so they don't get archived in 3 days. 03:20, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It is added to the to do list, which is why I had it on my mind when I saw the SB post too. However, I have just realised we can link it in with current articles as P-Foster added Fat activism as a stub a few weeks ago. Essentially both are choosing seriously unhealthy weight as a lifestyle choice. 08:54, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I meant the ELs he added, actually. Don't forget to crosslink diet woo and stuff like that.  We have a whole slew of food-based articles I suspect, now that I think about it.  21:51, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah, of course. Done. 22:04, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Spaceships and lasers to be used to test for proof Andy exists
NASA is going to test for gravitons, something about which no doubt Andy will be pleased. We can look forward to the Schlalfy Brothers duking it out again in public. Joy unbounded! <font color="#00F0A20">DogP <font color="#993300">Marmite Patrol 00:26, 11 May 2010 (UTC)


 * This is, of course, way cool - David Gerard (talk) 16:35, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Cool indeed, although I contest that "largest scientific apparatus ever" blurb. Surely a robot on Mars being run by and reporting to computers on Earth would be bigger?  Still takes nothing away from its coolth.  I wonder what they'll find?  21:36, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Action Obama!
Apparently, it's actually modeled on Obama, but they didn't think it came out well enough to be marketed as Obama - David Gerard (talk) 13:19, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It does feature a "real-like head" though. 21:45, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * BAHAHHAAAHAAHAAA!!! 22:03, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Hannutty: Iraq should pay for us invading him
Douche.--Thanatos (talk) 23:13, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Geek test
What is your response to...

"This is Free Trader Beowulf calling anyone.... Mayday... Mayday..."

?

MDB (talk) 12:14, 10 May 2010 (UTC)


 * "We are under attack..." –SuspectedReplicant retire me 12:24, 10 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Very good. I'm off to die during character creation now. MDB (talk) 15:46, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * This isn't the "all your base" thing, is it? 22:30, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Sounds familiar, although dying during character creation gives me original rules Traveller flashbacks, so I dunno. --Kels (talk) 22:49, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It's Traveller. I'd call "This is Free Trader Beowulf" one of the best RPG cover blurbs ever. MDB (talk) 23:24, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * So it's like the Foundation roleplaying game, but without the whole Asimov's-estate-suing-you-for-copyright-infringement thing. Clearly, it sucks.  -- 23:47, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Wow, I used to play with the set of black books waaaay back in the day. And only occasionally died during character creation, thank you. --Kels (talk) 23:51, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * But can it run NetBSD? --[[Image:Concrnedresident logo.png|140px|link=User:Concernedresident|Concernedresident|baseline]]Ask me about our jellybean 10:24, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

As far as it being the Foundation RPG, the basic books contained no setting; it was just generic rules for a science fiction RPG. The later published setting probably got a good part of their inspiration from the Good Doctor's works -- I'd speculate Asimov was the writer who influenced them the most. There are no robots, though (well, I think they might have been added later, but they were never as key to Traveller as they were to Asimov), and it's a lot more military oriented than Foundation. MDB (talk) 13:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)


 * There were no robots in the Foundation novels - except the later ones where he linked the Robots novels to the Foundation ones, and which were written well after Traveller. Never actually played it myself, but I knew several people who did and soon got to know about the cover blurb. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 13:34, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Elena Kagan -> SCOTUS
Thoughts?

The left seems to be generally receptive, while the right... well... <font style="font-family: Papyrus"><font color="#FF0000">Wodewick <font color="#800080">Welease Wodewick! 19:27, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Haha, that's pretty funny. 21:01, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Toles had a good one about that as well back in April 21:52, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't know... no experience as a judge, personal friend of the President... I'm getting a sense of deja vu all over again. MDB (talk) 22:04, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I think there's a very important difference. Kagan has served as the dean of Harvard Law, and Solicitor General (sometimes referred to as the 10th justice).  She may not have experience as a judge, but she has a long list of legal qualifications that Miers didn't have.  I seriously doubt that Obama will have to rely on the "She's my friend and I know her" argument to gain confirmation.  22:11, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Valid point, though still, I don't think it looks good politically to nominate someone to be a judge on the nation's highest court whose never been a judge.
 * On the other paw, before John Roberts destroyed any future he had in politics, I thought he would have made a kick-ass choice for the Court. His populist views about corporate power would be a good voice against another Citizens United decision.
 * I think Hillary Clinton would be a good justice, too, though I doubt if she had really wanted the job or been considered a possible candidate, she'd be at State now. If anything, nominating her would have introduced apoplexy in about half the American conservative movement. MDB (talk) 23:44, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Surely you mean John Edwards? Hillary gets her seat later in his second term.  00:36, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Some thoughts after reading ye old blogs n newspapers this afternoon...
 * MDB I get that Harriet Miers vibe too. The major problem the right had with her was never her lack of experience, but that she was not a strong pro-life anti-gay candidate. The reaction was basically "We worked our asses off for this?" A reasonable attitude when you take into account how Justice Souter turned out. The evangelicals elected Bush to end abortion and they wanted results.
 * Look past the "brilliant legal mind, consensus builder" boilerplate and one can say Kagan is a Miers of the left. She has little paper trail on corporate power and govt power, two SCOTUS issues liberals care deeply about. She is probably a solid vote on choice and gay rights.
 * I sense a lot of Obama in Kagan. The old joke goes: "Liberals are people who are too broad minded to take their own side of an argument." Look how that's worked out for Obama - all that "hands across the water" crap led to not a single GOP vote on stimulus or healthcare. I don't want a "fair minded even handed" SCOTUS nominee, I want one who will move the Court.
 * Republicans never ever ever apologize for being ideologues. They take every opportunity to punt the ball downfield. But liberals somehow think they were elected to build a centrist consensus? Once liberals get to Washington, they love getting attacked by the left. They brag that makes them reasonable since they're attacked from all sides. No, it makes them useless since they represent no constituency.
 * Kagan won't get Mier'd though, the Dem caucus will support and pass her nomination swiftly. <font style="font-family: Papyrus"><font color="#FF0000">Wodewick <font color="#800080">Welease Wodewick! 02:40, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Well put, Wodey. 03:17, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, of course I meant John Edwards. I can be a Bear of Very Little Brain at times. MDB (talk) 09:10, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, as long as we could figger out what you meant. Have some hunny. 09:16, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Wasn't Miers' real problem that she had no training nor education in Constitutional law (and didn't seem all that bright)? It seemed her entire nomination was based on that she was a lawyer and was a friend of Bush's. I don't know much about the position of Solicitor General, but I'm pretty sure that establishes at least a pretty sound foundation. Andy can go off about her never having been a judge, but neither was Rhenquist, and Andy seems to think he wasn't all that bad. DickTurpis (talk) 16:52, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Exactly. It's really hard to believe Kagan's being compared to Miers.  Miers was incredibly unqualified... Kagan was the Dean of Harvard Law.
 * It's true Kagan has a similar paper trail, but for very different reasons. Miers had done very little and so had no trail, whereas Kagan has done a lot but been very careful since her appointment as federal judge was filibustered by the Republicans in 1995.
 * And you're also right, Dick, when you note that Rehnquist wasn't a judge before he sat the bench. In fact, it's a pretty recent development to think that a Justice must have judicial experience.  Many of the most famous and some of the best justices had never sat a bench before, and some weren't even lawyers.-- 10:07, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Oh dear
I am now older than the Prime Minister. I am going to bed. Wake me in four years. Totnesmartin (talk) 22:05, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * In four/eight years time you'll likely be more popular than he is. -- ConcernedResident Ask me about our xylophone''' 22:07, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the club. I am older than the US President... and Andrew Schlafly.  22:20, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Kids! TerrySmall.png [[Image:Toast s.png|alt=Toast|text-bottom|20px|link=User talk:SusanG]] 22:50, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Indeed. Someday you shall be older than the Queen!  04:53, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm Younger than Liz, and Camilla, so i'm safe there. All I have to do is get William shacked up with Joan Collins and I'm fine. Totnesmartin (talk) 09:24, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
 * One day, Harry will be Queen! --Kels (talk) 15:48, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Johnson and his amazing big... thing
I just stumbled this weird gadget - can anyone explain it to this physics flunker? Is it missionable? Totnesmartin (talk) 22:00, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, it certainly looks like a Perpetual Motion Machine, so I'm sure it's the salvation of us all total bollocks.  However, he looks like a nice old codger.   <font color="#00F0A20">DogP <font color="#993300">Marmite Patrol 22:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Energy ex vaccuo is the same as energy ex culo, except with a new, fresher scent. Phallus of Satan (talk) 22:13, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

I much prefer the Supermagnet that isn't.-- 23:12, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The first paragraph under the picture sounds like it was written solely to confuse people. 23:41, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

A word of advice, Tottie: don't put "johnson", and "amazing big... thing" in the same sentence if you don't want me to make sexual innuendos. 00:04, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * (obituary)Howard Johnson Born June 1st, 1919, passed away January 2nd, 2008. Was he the motel guy or another Johnson ? His motor may have been perpetual, but he wasn't. RIP Howard Hamster (talk) 00:42, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I love Tom Bearden and his buddies, I really wish some of what they're on about was real - but it's not, sadly. 00:46, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't get it, and I consider myself to be fairly in the know about magnetism... 01:41, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * That's why you don't understand - because you have studied the topic. 01:52, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Page idea: scientific dickishness
I think we need a page about scientists who were complete dicks and the consequences this had for their work. Being right has nothing to do with your charm, but being a dick about it is not likely to help your work spread. Isaac Newton is the canonical scientific dick who was right, but Galileo counts for example. What's a good title? And good sources? - David Gerard (talk) 16:35, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Fred Hoyle? TerrySmall.png [[Image:Toast s.png|alt=Toast|text-bottom|20px|link=User talk:SusanG]] 16:43, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Newton was also a dick that got it wrong - don't forget he wrote more about alchemy than he did about gravity, optics, calculus and so on. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 17:14, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Or, alternatively, the 600 ton elephant in the room, Richard Dawkins. 19:44, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Is Dawkins a dick in scientific circles, though?  21:49, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Not that I'm aware of. He was and still is a well respected scientist, hardly a dick in that sense. There are probably very few that are dicks either on the professional level or to the degree that Newton was famous for, however. I could nominate a few academics I know that continue to have outright pissing contests with each other. Oh, and the head of department who has apparently shut down our electronics workshop, the fucktard. 21:56, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * There's also anyone ever who has been asked to be an external viva examiner, but being a dick is sort of in the job description there, if they don't give you the most harrowing experience of your life you haven't earned the doctorate. 22:00, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Dickipedia has a list of all dicks. 22:43, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I would nominate Hans Geiger, but ratting out your Jewish colleagues to the Nazis has got to nominate you a tag that is a lot stronger than "Dick".-- 23:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Edison. /thread.  -- 21:39, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Help a brother out
I've been hearing about videos showing the Gaia goo gushing from the Gulf sea floor but have had no success in finding them. Can anyone give me a pointer (and I don't mean a single finger salute) to where some might be found? 01:51, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * try google video oil spill floor, it lists some or the same one several times Hamster (talk) 03:37, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * perhaps THISHamster (talk) 03:39, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh shit, so it's a horizontal pipe that is broken. Nice work, BP. And thanks, Hamster!  04:04, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Nah, that can't be genuine. As I understand it, the leak is from the well they were plugging and abandoning when the blowout occured.  That video shows a leak from a subsea production pipeline - the leak will be coming from the wellhead, there's no production equipment (such as a pipeline) down there.  That said, the media reports have all been terrible, I have not read a single one that sounds like it was written by anyone with a clue about deepwater drilling, and very different terms and phrases are used interchangeably, so it's difficult to know exactly what is going on.  17:49, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It is from a pipeline. TerrySmall.png [[Image:Toast s.png|alt=Toast|text-bottom|20px|link=User talk:SusanG]] 17:53, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * In fact I believe there's more than one break in the line. TerrySmall.png [[Image:Toast s.png|alt=Toast|text-bottom|20px|link=User talk:SusanG]] 17:55, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * You see, this is the confusion that comes from sloppy journalism. There isn't a "line" down there.  This was an exploration well, so there's no pipelines or anything down there.  Looking at the BBC clip you linked to, it looked like that ROV was fannying around on what's left of the riser above the stack.  19:02, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia article statistics
These are the article view counts for Conservapedia compared against other WP articles in April 2010: RationalWiki doesn't have an article, but it received 533 hits from people looking for one. --Leotardo (talk) 04:14, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Conservapedia 11,643 hits
 * Phyllis Schlafly 20,392
 * Richard Dawkins 116,040
 * David Frum 19,236
 * David Duke 32,763
 * Christopher Hitchens 87,300
 * Atheism 189,967
 * Fluffer 45,163
 * We need article on David Frum. 05:30, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

In further comparison, Conservapedia's article cp:Conservapedia "has been accessed 39,781 times" in total. I'm not sure how accurate their stats are, but if that's over the life of the project, then in four months more people learn about Conservapedia through Wikipedia than they do from Conservapedia itself. cp:Phyllis Schlafly has been accessed 28,574 times. --Leotardo (talk) 15:59, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

In Our Time
One of the best programmes on BBC's Radio 4 is In Our Time, where Melvyn Bragg discusses topics usually of an historical or scientific theme with a group of experts. This morning he was discussing the ideas of William James (the brother of novelist Henry James) about religious experience. I heartily recommend this to all those who are interested in the psychological nature of religion. Some of our non-UK editors may find things of interest in previous episodes. I understand that the BBC's radio progs are downloadable from anywhere. 20:58, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * History Today was my favourite history programme. Totnesmartin (talk) 21:51, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Loya Jirga by-election
Totnesmartin plans to step down from the Loya Jirga, as he will be moving soon and be unavailable for a time. If you're interested, you can go vote for his replacement. 22:34, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Glenn Beck Has Nazi Tourette's (funniest shit I've seen all month)
Comic Lewis Black takes on Glenn Beck's being offended for being compared to Nazis, while he, himself, is absolutely a violator of Godwin's Law. This is fucking funny, because it's Beck is sooooo hypocritical, and gets caught in the act again and again. 01:04, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Brian Hetfield - Enter You
This is like the funkiest mash up ever: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c13TuINaxJk 22:09, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I think my favourite cracked-out mashup was Fall Out Boy/Metal Man level from the original Megaman. --Kels (talk) 23:32, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Kels: I can has link to this most glorious mashup?   00:05, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Here 'tis. Caution, there be monsters on that site, so don't get too curious.  Also, try this one. --Kels (talk) 04:25, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Kels! That's awesome.   08:05, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 8bit mash-ups are a new one on me... strangely compelling, too. 15:39, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * RenardV is pretty good with stuff like that, there's a bunch of his original music here, including I think some free stuff. Oh, and if you're into chiptunes/8-bit, mashups and other oddities, you might be interested in Doogtopia Radio, which is streamed by a guy I know online. --Kels (talk) 15:54, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Mark Vidler (Go Home Productions) and CCC are my two favourite mashup creators - genius is theirs.  <font color="#00F0A20">DogP <font color="#993300">Marmite Patrol 16:37, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Andy Rehfeldt does some good "reimaginings" rather than mash-ups, but they swing from the hilarious (A Wonderful World death metal style) to the catchy (Wait and Bleed Disney style) to "why the fuck isn't this the original because it's brilliant" (You Belong With Me metal version). 16:00, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Cracked and an interesting article
6 Gender Stereotypes that Science Says Are True. I found it to be an interesting read. 05:41, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Always fun. 06:05, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Fun indeed. But I'm not totally convinced by the first one, which seems like post hoc evolutionary psychology gone wrong. 07:49, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I believe that these stereotypes do have a grain of truth, that there is a general difference between men and women. However, one should think of the gender faculties as being like two overlapping distribution curvess. There will be different peaks but one gender will predominate at a particular skill. Of course that doesn't mean that a significant portion of the opposite gender won't be as equally gifted, and there will be outliers of one gender who can beat the majority of the other. If one thinks of tennis for example, Roger Federer will probabaly beat the top female player 9 times out of 10 but one of the Williams sisters would probably beat most male tennis players outside the top 10. 20:03, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Women always say I have "Go to bed" eyes. They look at them and say "Christ! Go to bed!" 20:37, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The overlapping curves description seems pretty good actually. I wss wondering how many people accept the idea that, with regard to intelligence, women are higher on average, but have a lower distribution - because I'm pretty sure my experience backs that up. 08:16, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Men and women have the same mean intelligence, but men have a higher variance. Journal article for those with access.  08:35, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Ok for those who care.
I'm going better then last time and i may come back at making good article filled with unintentional spelling mistake this week, that is if you guy don't mind... since the last Incident... so what do you guy think?Waronstupidity (talk) 20:12, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * r0x0r!!11 Bring it on. (Glad you're feeling better by the way, Josh will be scared again) 20:24, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I take my Medecine in a serious way (missed it one day only cause i was too sleepy)... but anyway the most nooby Rational user is back and more Healthy then ever.Waronstupidity (talk) 20:28, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Welcome back, Warren! Don't think you're going to out-noob Josh though. 20:36, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Echoing what someone else said before, don't ever think "I'm better now, I can stop taking my meds" unless your doctor says so. I know that sounds obvious but you'd be surprised at the number of people who do that. 20:38, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * No n00b from Canada can out-n00b an Englishman. 21:10, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * If you're back, cool, but truly heed those who say "don't stop your meds just because you think you're better". Come here for fun, not fulfillment, okay?  07:09, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Guten Morgen, mein Englisch freunden
Your wiki has been destroyed while you slept. Annexation will proceed directly. 06:28, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Glückliche Fahrt! 06:29, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Your papers, please... DickTurpis (talk) 06:30, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * What's all this, then? Röstigraben (talk) 06:42, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Human went Marcus. However, not everyone got hit with a block. 07:39, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Some day the people shall rise and wrest control of this wiki from your cold metal hands. Until that happens, may I offer my services as an informer, lickspittle, short-order chef and all-round tool of the fascist oppressor? -- ConcernedResident weasel for the ladies 10:08, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * By all means. DickTurpis (talk) 12:40, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Why is it...
... that all the spam e-mails I get at my work address are in Chinese? (Or some Asian language. The names attached to them sound Chinese, to me.)

My company doesn't have a name that sounds Chinese. We don't do business in China (we do web development for various Federal agencies, mostly concentrated on health and procurement tools.) My username doesn't sound Chinese.

And that's all the spam I get (which I suppose is a good thing, but still...) I don't get Viagra ads. I don't have Nigerian government officials wanting to help them get money out of their country. I don't get miracle weight loss systems or stop smoking techniques or any of the other spam messages. Just stuff in Chinese.

It puzzles me to no end. MDB (talk) 11:13, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * A lot of online scams run out of China, so it doesn't surprise me very much. Maybe these particular spammers have just latched onto the fact that your email address is a real one so you're getting more from them.  Maybe the other spam sent to you is already filtered out by your company's IT system, & the Chinese stuff is slipping through because the system doesn't recognise spam in Chinese.   17:13, 14 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Cancel your Underground Communist Sympathizer lifetime subscription. Also, NEVER drop off your business card in the fishbowl on the counter at the Panda Express. The Foxhole Atheist (talk) 17:19, 14 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, the part about my company's spam filters deleting the rest makes sense, until I compare it to my personal account at gmail. gmail doesn't delete anything, it just puts it in your spam filter. I look at that occasionally, and see nothing in Chinese. So why do I get it at work but not at gmail? MDB (talk) 17:41, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It may well be that the sheer volume of English spam has overwhelmed the Chinese. 21:09, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It is odd, in that they are in Chinese. I get a steady trickle of vendors attempting to obtain my business, but most of them are real companies selling products in my industry.  They're always in something resembling English, though.  How big is your company?  Maybe they think you have Chinese speakers on board?  Are you sure they're actually spam and not "legitimate" cold sales calls?  23:55, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Oil leak is apparently worse then people originaly thought
http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0513/gulf-oil-gusher-ten-times-worse-prior-estimates/ Wow, "Already, the pollution exceeds a scale which most individual humans can fully grasp." I think that say's it all right there. Ryantherebel (talk) 14:50, 14 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Whilst there's no such thing as a good oil spill it's still pretty tame when compared to, for example, the Amoco Cadiz. Try this link Jack Hughes (talk) 15:32, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * This was in a newsletter I get:
 * ''The second largest oil spill in history occurred at PEMEX's "IXTOC 1" well. That was the last time a massive blowout occurred in the Gulf of Mexico (yes, it's happened before). Mexico's state-run oil company let 3.3 million barrels of oil leak out before they got the well plugged.
 * ''It will take 20 months for that much oil to leak out of the current well. We're at 22 days right now, roughly 110,000 barrels – or half the size of the Exxon Valdez spill.
 * ''What will make this spill so devastating is its proximity to land. Louisiana could lose its entire oyster industry forever.
 * 16:14, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Lac of good political slogans
I was just thinking while eating my lunch... nobody uses really catchy, memorable political campaign slogans anymore.

Can anyone tell me (without looking it up first!) what slogans the Obama and McCain campaign slogans used in 2008?

I think we need candidates who'll just use some of the old-style slogans. Wouldn't it be cool if someone ran for high office using a slogan like "Tippecanoe and Tyler, Too" or "Fifty four forty or fight!" (Okay, so, the latter is pretty much an endorsement of war with Canada. They've been asking for it for years anyway.) MDB (talk) 15:44, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * From what I remember, Obama just used "hope" and "change". Whilst the republicans said "drill, baby, drill" a couple of times. 15:52, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I believe McCain's slogan was "Freedom" and Obama's was "Socialism!" DickTurpis (talk) 16:01, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I thought Obama was "Yes, we can."--BobSpring is sprung! 16:11, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Didn't Obama have: "Can we do it? Yes we can!" 16:12, 14 May 2010 (UTC) TerrySmall.png [[Image:Toast s.png|alt=Toast|text-bottom|20px|link=User talk:SusanG]]
 * Ha! just missed an EC with you there Bob. 16:13, 14 May 2010 (UTC) TerrySmall.png [[Image:Toast s.png|alt=Toast|text-bottom|20px|link=User talk:SusanG]]
 * Obligatory link to "yes we can!" 16:14, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * en passant(sp?) isn't a "lac" (typo in header) a rather large number in sanskrit or something? 16:29, 14 May 2010 (UTC) TerrySmall.png [[Image:Toast s.png|alt=Toast|text-bottom|20px|link=User talk:SusanG]]
 * "Lac: a great number; specifically, 100,000." 16:31, 14 May 2010 (UTC) TerrySmall.png [[Image:Toast s.png|alt=Toast|text-bottom|20px|link=User talk:SusanG]]
 * That's lakh isn't it? Lac is an insect secretion that is made into shellac, wot the old 78s were made of. Totnesmartin (talk) 17:45, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, it's a transliteration from a different alphabet so ...? I found the above on some dictionary site. 18:42, 14 May 2010 (UTC) TerrySmall.png [[Image:Toast s.png|alt=Toast|text-bottom|20px|link=User talk:SusanG]]

Back on track, I believe the McCain slogan was "Country First." 20:13, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Back on Track? We were on track! McCain's early slogans were recorded on 78s! Totnesmartin (talk) 20:39, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

It's summer time - so, mass debate.
It's actually a nice day here in Britain at long last. So, in celebration... Discuss: Strawberries are in fact not terribly nice as fruit go, being vastly outclassed by such competition as the delectable water melon, the versatile kiwi or even the ignoble grape. -- 14:40, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
 * If only I knew what a goat fruit is... 20:41, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

<multi poll="Best Fruit"> Strawberries kiwifruit grape raspberry Melon Goat Fruit Gooseberries


 * Nice to see the Raspberry pulling ahead, unlike Gordon Brown.  But I think we all know what to think of the rather more recherché strawberry and its slutty little friend, the kiwi.   For the life of me I can't understand the strong contention from the grape - a fruit who's only purpose is to be trampled upon and fermented, and which is only eaten in hospital by the ailing.   Things are all to rights in the world, though, with the cane-borne red fruit leading the pack.  Now, who wants summer pudding?   Olé!  Olé!   Olé!   <font color="#00F0A20">DogP <font color="#993300">Marmite Patrol 21:44, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
 * But what about the swing, Brian? 05:27, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I changed my vote, can I do that Steve? 08:32, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Now That's What I Call A Landslide!  <font color="#00F0A20">DogP <font color="#993300">Marmite Patrol 21:07, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Nostalgia just hit me recently.....
And i felt the need to play old game of my childhood (super nintendo and N64).... ahhhhhh goldeneye..... I know much of you guy are over 30 but im 19 and miss the day of when old game like Zelda Ocarina of time was teh SHIT! Anyone else felt nostalgia about something recently? Waronstupidity (talk) 21:03, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I've just finished my first year of university and I am generally bumming around reminiscing of times past. Primarily high school and the last year of university. Oh, and this one time I saw a squirrel and took a picture of it. That was a good day. 21:07, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * My nostalgia is cut horribly short by the crappy TV I have right now. I got a promotional gamecube disk with all the N64 zeldas on it, but I can't play it now because it requires some mode that my TV doesn't support. All digital input FTW. -- 21:10, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I still occasionally dust off the NES, but my SNES and N64 haven't seen much action over the last few years. &mdash; Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 21:13, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * i remember how as a kid when my mother was drunk i used to play super Nintendo and hoped she wouldn't wake up (mother an hopeless alcoholic)

I had only one game back then (damn the console was a gift from my grand mother since we couldn't afford anything)but even if that game was sucky it made me have hour of fun, it was super Mario of course.........Waronstupidity (talk) 21:18, 13 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I remember when me and my school "buddy" played goldeneye for hour.Waronstupidity (talk) 21:19, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Nostalgia?  Ah yes, I've been doing a fair old bit of it myself recently.   Reacquainted myself with Remain in Light and My Life In The Bush Of Ghosts, two  albums that bring me right back to a time and a place.    Nostalgia isn't what it used to be, though.   <font color="#00F0A20">DogP <font color="#993300">Marmite Patrol 21:31, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Two fine and wonderful albums! Remain in Light was the first album I ever bought. Totnesmartin (talk) 21:48, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Not my first, but a wonderful album. May have been the first I unintentionally quoted.  07:13, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

An american friend, who has lived here in Oz for 3 1/2 years recently returned to America. I decided to burn a CD of Australian music for her, so, several (very late) hours and two CD's later, I had just scratched the surface. Ever since I have been adding to an Oz Rock playlist and revisiting all those songs from my youth (and even not so youth). Right now I'm listening to 'Because I Love You' by the Masters Apprentices. <font color="blue" face = "Comic Sans MS">RagTop <font color="teal" face = "Comic Sans MS>Gone sailing 04:57, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I lost quite a lot of my first year at uni to Goldeneye on the N64. I'm waiting for Wii64 to become powerful enough to emulate it so I can play it again on my Wii. 07:46, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Fat chance. Microsoft will never let Rare release any of their good games on platforms other than XO. As for the original question, I feel nostalgic for the 90s every day. Vulpius (talk) 11:28, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Erm, I was referring to Wii64, the homebrew app, not the official Nintendo ports (because you're right, the Rare games will never appear). 14:10, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Ohhh, I see. Though it doesn't make the chance any thinner as I don't think there's any N64 emulator in existence that can run GoldenEye smoothly. Vulpius (talk) 15:08, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It works fine with the PC version of the emulator, you can even play across the tubes (see here), but for some reason the Wii version isn't up to scratch yet. 20:51, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Demographics
Reminded by the above post, it has been at the back of my mind for a while but there ought to be page where we can use the awesome poll voting system to indicate gender, age range, educational background, geographical location, religious POV etc. to give a demographic overview of RW. I keep meaning to do it but perhaps someone can usurp my ambition. 21:22, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * good idea.Waronstupidity (talk) 21:23, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, that is a good idea.  I'll click those votey slidery thingies until the cows come home for some reason.   <font color="#00F0A20">DogP <font color="#993300">Marmite Patrol 21:33, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * That's an excellent idea. What should the categories be? 22:17, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I've been toying with exactly the same idea at the back of my mind for ages, but wasn't sure how it would be received. A kind of RW census. The way I envisioned it was a big table where everyone can fill in their details, so it's easy to count up & do some pie charts or something when there are enough responses. All data should be entirely voluntary, so if someone wants to answer all the questions except one or two, they can just leave those blank. Obvious categories (mostly already mentioned by Lily) could include: 22:51, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Year (or decade) of birth (not age as it will go out of date)
 * Gender
 * Sexuality
 * Marital/relationship status (maybe - don't want to stray too far into Facebook territory)
 * Location (country, town/city optional)
 * Occupation (or sector)
 * Education level
 * Religious POV (summarised in one or two words)
 * Political POV (summarised in one or two words)
 * I suspect you would receive a more hostile reception than the US census received in the Deep South amongst Glen Beck viewers. 00:30, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The voting system used on these pages which can be grouped into categories seems like a pretty anonymous way of supplying information. 07:38, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * While a non-anonymous version would ensure we got the active users rather than passers-by, anonymous polling would be the better option. I'd say to put it on a spearate page with multipolls for the above categories. Don't forget to add "other" to them, though. While I don't think there are any RW members that are as pissy with their sexuality and gender as some of the people I know (seriously, some have tried to make up their own in order to seem "unique") it's worth remembering. Also, for gathering data, polling would be better than asking for a few words, so long as the terms were defined, you could use the 7 or 5 point Kinsey-style scale for them. 08:11, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Do it like this: 20:27, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Continent of domicile
<multi poll="experimental demo example"> Africa Antarctica Asia Australia Europe North America South America Atlantis

Services and stuff
Do we have a page in which people can offer services in specific wiki-stuff? i.e. if ArmondikoV were an expert in physics, image editing, and proof reading, this could be advertised somewhere for people to go and ask them for help? I saw a similar thing at Uncyclopedia and it was pretty handy. -- ConcernedResident factoid for the ladies 10:31, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmmmmm thats an interesting suggestion, though how would it work? I best make haste to Uncyclopedia! Acei9 10:41, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Over there I heard about it as a word of mouth thing when I was looking for an image, I think for my article about Dawkins being bummed silly by dinosaurs. Maybe an addition to the help pages, with a list of people of people and suggestions on what they might do. Doesn't have to be a commitment where people should expect to be at the back and call of anyone who wants a hand - more a way of sharing interests. I'd figure that if someone is half-decent at something then they probably enjoy doing it. I'd say keep it informal. -- ConcernedResident pork chop for the ladies 10:56, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Totnesmartin for all your tea, chips, seventies comedy and weird electronic squonky music needs. Sounds good to me. Totnesmartin (talk) 11:09, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Ace McWicked - a one stop shop for all your colourful language needs. Acei9 11:10, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * (EC x a bijillion)In theory, that's what userboxes are for. Although they'd only work as a "reference" if 1) they contained transcluded categories to list individuals on there and 2) they were removed from inactive users as there's no point asking someone who's not around. Also, I'm not an expert in physics, although I'd say I know "enough". It'd probably be too complicated to give people "levels" though. Perhaps just a list in the RW space of active and committed users who are listed as "go to" people for certain subjects. 11:13, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, the list is probably the easiest way to go about it. Easy to maintain because it can be purged if ends up full of zombies. I'll knock-up a basic page in the sandbox and get some opinions. Probably tomorrow or Sunday. Incidentally, remember Concernedresident for all of your deflowering (ladies) and vodka mixing needs. -- ConcernedResident sea bass for the ladies 13:15, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I believe we have the category "go-to guys" if that would help. 17:22, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * That probably can be used. Cheers. I'll check the help to see if there's the category is linked in the help (ideally in a way that's visible to anyone following the link from the Welcome template. It's nice for newbies to have some names they can hit if they're a bit confused or wondering why they're being yelled at? -- ConcernedResident centrifuge for the ladies 17:26, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I would be happy to guide any number of newbies, though I'm afraid I have no useful technical skills.  23:12, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

At least Pat Buchanan is more intellectually honest than CP
I'm too damn lazy to hunt up a reference, but CP expressed concern that, with Justice Stevens retirement, there would be "no Protestants" on the Court.

Pat Buchanan, at least, was honest and took that a step further, arguing Kagan means too many Jews on the Court. MDB (talk) 18:31, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * CP refuses to even acknowledge that she's a Jew. &mdash; Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 18:34, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, its very hypocritical for a pro-Israel person to be a flaming anti-Semite. So, if they just make Kagan not Jewish, the problem is resolved and they can go on hating her in peace. 14:50, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Please, please don't let Uncle Ed see my dance video mommy
Hide it from him, as it will likely get it's own article. On one hand, the performance is amazing; on the other hand, all the single ladies (all the single ladies) are seven years old. --Leotardo (talk) 19:13, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * That's horrible.  19:18, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Video yanked. 00:00, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, it was a pedo's dream. I haven't looked into it at all except the video, but it was some sort of school production/competition with seven year old girls, dressed in heels, panties and sequined bras performing Beyonce's Single Ladies as they danced more like the jail ladies from Lady Gaga's Telephone. To wild cheers.  It truly was the exact mix of awe at these girls' dance talent--seriously--while feeling completely disgusted by it at the same time.  --Leotardo (talk) 01:28, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I heard about it today on my commie radio. Glad I couldn't get confused by seeing it...  02:40, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * it may be HERE my link is too slow to see it Hamster (talk) 21:54, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

How could all have been so blind?
Why is a redlink? Oh, the shame! Can a good templatographer correct this terrible gap at the heart of RationalWiki? Totnesmartin (talk) 20:48, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * What do you want for this goat template? I can make one, I think. LimpWrist (talk) 23:42, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay, now it is a small goat that links to the goat article. Speaking of which Conservapedia has overtaken it as the most linked to article, any suggestions on how to remedy this? 00:00, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Go around deleting silly links to the CP article? Link to goat more often? 00:02, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * That is the unimaginative way of doing it. 00:07, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, for a long time I had a hidden link to goat in my username, which inflated its link count by over a thousand. Several of us could try the same thing again.   00:23, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Problem is that most of edit the same talk pages and so each only count for one link. 00:25, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Yah, but Human is linked by so many pages (for a long time he was second only to goat) that his sig alone would add at least two thousand to the count.  00:34, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Throw in Bob M and I and that's another 500 to 1,000. Think of it, Pi—at last, all of us united in a common cause!   00:37, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Why not just go ahead & put a link to it in the navigation box? 00:40, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The navigation box is only on one page. 00:41, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Woo hoo, I just single handedly blew the job queue out to 1,447 jobs by editing my signature. 00:41, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I thought that was me?  00:49, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The most common way of backing up the job queue is by editing a high use "template". 00:51, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The simple key is to make sure goat is linked just often enough at SB and talkWiGOCP to get into every archive. Can pibot simply take care of that? 02:39, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The easiest thing to do would be to add a link to Template:Talkpage, but that will only get you another 510 links. The welcome message will get you over another 3,000 links. 02:44, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Adding a hidden link at welcome would make sense. 03:38, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * We could stick it behind the brain. 03:42, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It would be funny to link the brainz to goat yeah. Talk about your job queue then! 03:45, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 173 at the moment. Probably a caching issue. Oh well it is above User:Radioactive afikomen at the moment, that should make him happy. 03:49, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay the job queue has kicked in at 3,256. I think we stand a good chance of getting goat to number 3 by the end of that. 04:29, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Why not just make all userboxes link to goat? 22:04, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Um, not that simple of a fix:


 * 1) Conservapedia ‎(8,688 links)
 * 2) RationalWiki:Copyright violations ‎(7,683 links)
 * 3) User:Human ‎(4,766 links)
 * 4) User talk:Human ‎(4,585 links)
 * 5) RationalWiki:Newcomers ‎(3,905 links)
 * 6) RationalWiki:Community Standards ‎(3,720 links)
 * 7) RationalWiki:How I found RationalWiki ‎(3,495 links)
 * 8) RationalWiki:What is a RationalWiki article? ‎(3,126 links)
 * 9) Category:Image copyright notices ‎(2,505 links)
 * 10) Goat ‎(2,492 links)
 * 11) User:Radioactive afikomen ‎(2,078 links)

The real key is to figure out why CP has so many inlinks. That's an insane number. 9000??? Also, the copyvio thing is interesting, I take it that comes automatically from some bot that edited all images without our latest copy templates? 04:10, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, I see, theoretically copyvio is linked from every single page. So how does CP beat that?  04:12, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * CP screenshot has links to both CP and RationalWiki:Copyright violations. It is also about the third most used template. 04:13, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Let's really break the job queue and fix that? 05:09, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * What is there to fix? -- Nx  / talk 09:55, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It doesn't break it, just backs it up a bit. 06:15, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Yah. Everyone knows that the fastest way to break the wiki would be to simultaneously delete the Saloon bar, Talk:Main Page, Human's talk page, and WIGO talk:CP.   06:20, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Nx would have that fixed within a twinkle of an eyelid, dahling. 08:13, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * He's a lot like a genie that way, isn't he?  08:16, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Back to the template
After a few hours of existence it is the 21st most used template. 10:03, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Probably only because it is in your sig. 14:47, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Blankets - how do they work?
Those of you who enjoyed the ICP video for "Miracles" a few weeks back might enjoy the parody done by SNL - "Where does the Sun go to hide at night?", and "Blankets - how do they work?" <font color="#00F0A20">DogP <font color="#993300">Marmite Patrol 19:57, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Ha, I saw the parody last week without having any idea what it was spoofing. 21:09, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Some irreverent humor
From HuffPo. 21:31, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Portal
Today, Steam, as part of a nefarious plot to cause students everywhere to fail their approaching exams, is allowing people to download the game Portal for free. Get it here. EddyP (talk) 16:39, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, I've been playing that fucker ALL DAY....fascinating.  Now, back to Portal...  <font color="#00F0A20">DogP <font color="#993300">Marmite Patrol 16:48, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * And it's available for Mac OS. Woot! You, {SUBJECT NAME HERE}, must be the pride of {SUBJECT HOMETOWN HERE}! -- ConcernedResident vomit for the ladies 16:52, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * And it also works under Linux. Eggselent Bondurant (talk) 17:54, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Portal is absolutely brilliant. But never forget:  The Cake Is A Lie.  Also, kind of annoying that it's free, I paid for the game only a few months ago.  P.S.  When you complete the game hang around for the end song, well worth it.-- 18:01, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm trying to install it now, but, having installed all the Steam stuff, I'm getting the message that the servers are too busy to let me download the game.  18:51, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Screams in delight* I really hope that my graphics drivers, which were screwed when I upgraded to Lucid, won't crash my X server when I try to play it. 18:57, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Cool. I may now join all the others who actually paid for the game in feeling betrayed.  Hey Steam, gimme my fucking money back! --Kels (talk) 19:16, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah you probably can't download it at the moment, but go create an account and get your copy of the game linked to play it later. Portal is the best game ever. "For your safety, the Enrichment Centre is required to provide you with full health and safety information for each of these tasks, for example, the floor in this room will kill you, try to avoid it". 19:30, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I see the offer is until May 24. 20:04, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * As far as I can make out, it means as long as you register it before 24th you get It for free, rather than you can play the game for free until the 24th. 20:24, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, that is what I meant, you don't have to rush over today to get it. 20:27, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Right, with you. I thought you meant "AARRGH FUCK, IT'S ONLY UNTIL THE 24TH AND I'M LOSING VALUABLE PLAYING DAYS" umm, or something. What were we talking about?
 * Oh and, when you've finished, don't forget to download all the user contributed custom maps and play those as well! I can't remember the site and can't be arsed to look for it now so I'll post it tomorrow if I remember. 20:41, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't really understand the fuss about portal. It's only original in the sense that it's the first such game I've seen that puts that kind of puzzle in to a first person 3D environment. What might be thought of as "story mode" is fun enough, but has zero replay value. Plus the achievement mode, where you struggle to figure out how to do a map taking only 3 steps, or using only one portal or whatever just strikes me as total masturbation and doesn't appeal at all. I think I might have liked more test chambers, and less of roaming through the barren back lot. The test chambers seemed to offer far more interesting puzzles. -- 21:07, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Way to miss the storyline. It's scribbled all over the 'back lot' and the computers.-- 02:46, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * So Get once I get a stable connection again. Then I can get 'Still Alive' and Mod the crap out of the game. Fun mod is the one where the Companion Cube whispers to you when you turn around, is creepily close when you look at it again, and attempts to stab you when you pick it up. "The symptoms most commonly produced by Enrichment Center testing are superstition, perceiving inanimate objects as alive, and hallucinations. The Enrichment Center reminds you that the weighted companion cube will never threaten to stab you and, in fact, cannot speak." GLaDOS, you lied to me again! -- CodyH (talk) 14:40, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Dammit, now I hate you all. I've been playing nonstop for the past three days.  AND there's engineering to be done (for those who are still alive, of course...). -- 23:02, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Very Demotivational does Beck
Godwin's Law, every weeknight... - Ravenhull (talk) 01:22, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Gawd, what's the copyright on that image? We at least need it at Glenn Beck!  02:36, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, the screenshot will be Fair Use under "criticism and satire" while the joke itself probably can't have copyright status. 15:08, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Good point, I didn't think of that. 19:44, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Are we sure? The picture of Beck will be fair use under that rationale, but what about the picture with the black frame & caption? Unless we make our own version, I don't think we can just upload the image straight from their website. 21:33, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, no, you wouldn't. Firstly, it has the site's name on it, so we'd have to go by that site's copyright policy - if we crop the name out, it's dishonest. However, regarding that site's copyright policy, if they said "all images are copyright us, and any replication is verbotten" I'd see it as pretty dodgy, as all they're copyrighting is an obvious joke with an FU image on it, and I don't think you can copyright something when a large proportion of the source material is FU and I'm not convinced you could copyright the text underneath in the same way that companies copyright slogans. The best route for RW to take to use that, IMO, is to take the screenshot separately, under the same FU rational, and stick the tagline as an image caption, rather than as a "demotivator" - not least because the whole demotivator meme is getting a little old and is generally unreadable if we want it to be seen in an article.  08:29, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * So let's do it. 08:47, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Awww, but, you know, effort, 'nd shit. 09:12, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. 09:19, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

What the hell...
Why Everyone getting Demoted?(De'cratted )? and why everyone seem hostile to each other today? like people deleting each other comment on talk page and such...?Waronstupidity (talk) 05:07, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * the only one who is hostile is that little bitchcunt MC. otherwise, nothing is out of the ordinary here today, from the looks of it. 05:23, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * i guess hes the one fucking thing around today.....Waronstupidity (talk) 06:06, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Sometimes we make big poopies on each other here for fun, WoS. It's the way we play.  It's not personal.  08:11, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * We're just foolin' around! Seriously! It's not like it's a CP-led plot to decentralize the power of RatWiki and lead to a troll/flame war that will destory the enemies of conservatism! Nothing like that at all! -- CodyH (talk) 14:47, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I had to unblock myself today -yesterday?- in order to edit, as a result of the previous night shenanigans. OMG!  08:53, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Where to put it?
Phyllis Schlafly commenting on Elena Kagan's nomination: "Instead, Obama tries to force on Americans someone whose background shows she is more interested in remaking the law than in applying it impartially. A baseball umpire would be a better selection - and probably fairer, too." 14:40, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Why do these bloggers never bother to link to a reliable source? 19:45, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * That's like asking the guy down the pub to explain how he knows everything about law, sport, social issues, religion, politics, science, movies, music, and pretty everything in the Milky Way. -- ConcernedResident banana for the ladies 20:06, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Yah, but Schlafly doesn't have the excuse of being drunk.  23:07, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * You missed that one, RA. It's a scienceblogs blogger, not bothering to link to the source of a quote.  With no link, I think quote is either a lie or some internet meme with a half-life of one day.  Find where she actually said it, someone, and also, castigate the lame scienceblogger.  08:56, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

This is what called sourcing, bitches, learn how to do it or lose your blogger wings. 08:57, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

"The liberal double standard is undeniable. Liberals who insisted that..." Name the writer. 08:58, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Andrew Schlafly. 09:11, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

What birthers believe
MDB (talk) 18:56, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Amusing. Should we link it from our birther page (we have one, right?)?  19:49, 15 May 2010 (UTC)


 * A very funny video. Nice find, and certainly something worth adding to the birther page. -- ConcernedResident glycerin for the ladies 20:06, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Good video! Very funny and yet sooooo accurate, in my humblest of opinions. LimpWrist (talk) 22:38, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Pasting into Birther now. 06:37, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * That is awesome. Reminds me a lot of the "This is what Scientologists actually believe" bit from South Park. Except Xenu strapping people to a volcano and blasting them with nuclear warheads is believably, by comparison. 08:24, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The Bush part was hilarious! Anyone else notice the watermelon at the end?--Thanatos (talk) 14:07, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Atheism and animal rights.
I am sure some of us heathens on here kill insects. At the same time I am going to hope none of us would stomp on a kitten. That being said, what is the rationale for killing insects as opposed to larger, cuter animals? I'm not talking about insects that generally carry disease or those that are poisonous. In addition, what is the rationale for the inherent difference in value between humans and animals in an atheistic universe? I know the standard arguments so if you argue by bringing up some sort of unique attribute of humans just assume I'll say, "So?". That humans are intelligent or feel emotions is not an argument in and of itself. Just wondering your guy's thoughts. NetharianCubicles are prisons! 20:03, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Rather stupidly I do find killing insects distasteful. I usher flies out the window and hope not to tread on ants. 20:08, 15 May 2010 (UTC) TerrySmall.png [[Image:Toast s.png|alt=Toast|text-bottom|20px|link=User talk:SusanG]]
 * I don't get your premise. I don't know of anyone who kills insects that don't meet those criteria.  Spiders, yeah, but not insects.  20:12, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure if there is a good rationale for doing so. A lot of people just think, "Eek! A bug!" and then squash it without thinking about it. No one that I know of dissects the ethical dilemma that the situation before them before they hack at a spider with a rolled-up newspaper. 21:12, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Um... yeah... not my cup of tea, but whatever helps ya get yer rocks off I suppose. 21:28, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Not what I was getting at, but I suppose that could be a rationalization. 21:49, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, that wasn't directed at you, just anyone out there who... y'know, is into that sort of thing. Sorry, guess I didn't word that too well. 06:14, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I am hoping you dont mean those vids of womans feet squishing bugs, hamsters and stuff. squishing hamsters is evil, cockroaches not so much cause they are not cute Hamster (talk) 21:43, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree with you about hamsters and whatnot; However if, as you say, they want to take out a few cockroaches that's fine by me. 06:14, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

I usually go by brain complexity. And general perceived conciousnes complexity those things have. Kittens > Insects. Humans > Kittens etc. However, if you are making some kind of Is ought argument there, then yes, there is no such thing as inherent difference in value. The universe is Anarchy all the way down etc etc. However, what the universe is, is different to me not liking being dead. (And also don't like to hurt other people anyway). So as per Reciprocal Altruism, I think its a good idea not to kill humans because I think that the benefits of a society where we don't kill each other (and in fact go after murderers) and where inventors are free to invent (eg, cures), outweight "believing" in a society where people do so and where I might get killed. Animals on the other hand, can neither really perceive all that (except the really intelligent ones, which we usually feel more affinity to as well. Ie, dogs/cats which you take care of them, become friendly vs feral ones) neither can effectively "punish" you either, so I guess "the game" is completely broken for them. To sum up then, you could say that the rational reasons for valuing humans lives, is that humans can kill you back if you piss them off, and societies where people don't kill each other, give to the thinking people more time to think and thus you get more goodies as well. While being nice to animals doesn't really provide all these benefits back. Thus an evil, egoist, totally bastardious, amoral, atheist, selfish gene assembly, still has an interest in supporting such a human life valuing system if it knows what is really good for it but also for the same reasons value animal life less.

However, speaking of knowing what is really good for you, generally not killing back anything that can't properly fight, might be a good idea in the long run, especially if we meet some day an alien species that is much more powerful than us at which point the opinion "eh, they can't hurt us, so we can do what we like with them" might come to bite us back in our rear ends. Basically it goes like this: Said Aliens etc, might be either "good" or "evil". (meaningless definitions for the universe. You might as well call them X and Y) If they are "evil", you are screwed anyway. If they are "good" however, then why run the risk of pissing them off by sadistically torturing animals for no objective need? So generally being kind & loveable and trying not to kill too many things, as well as valuing intelligence (so we can say, hey, at least we only tried to kill things that didn't feel it much) can also be an exctinction-by-orbital-bombardment minimizing risk for a civilization to have.

There are also other kinds of psychological tie-ins here and there. For example it is assumed in the above that the reason someone wouldn't torture a "weak" human, is because he will game-theory work out that he has an interest in not supporting a society where that happens, in case he happens to be weak some day in the future. Humans however are not exactly perfect machines or anything. Someone keen in torturing animals clearly believes that harming weak things that can't harm you back is ok. So someone could say that he could do the wrong neural connections regarding human lives as well (as it happens). As a result, a society has an interest to generally concider all these things bad or at least try to turn attention away from intelligent things (concider animal rights a pre-emtive defense from psychopaths) and towards things that look less like us (eg: insects) Sen (talk) 02:44, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I only kill things that are health risks, pests, vermin, etc. I help stinging insects fly back out my door.  I kill mice, ants, and grizzly bears.  06:20, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I was a buddhist for ten years... even now I eat cats and dogs still don't hurt anything intentionally. Totnesmartin (talk) 10:09, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Is it too early to remind ourselves of the great sentient starfish debate?
 * It isn't necessarily an "animal rights" issue since so few people wholeheartedly embrace the concept of animal rights, & those that do either oppose killing insects (remember the moonbat furore over Obama's fly-swatting) or apply some sort of rationalisation such as only attributing rights to more complex animals which are perceived to have consciousness. For the rest of us, we only kill animals where there's a reason to.  With insects, this is usually because they're a nuisance to us in some way, such as getting into our buildings, or feeding on crops.  Killing them is easy & doesn't make much of a mess.  & Since they're not fluffy & cute, people have fewer qualms about killing them than other creatures.   10:25, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It's probably the "cute and fluffy" factor I think. Hence why ALF and PETA propaganda almost always uses that picture of bunnies at Huntingdon Life Sciences, rather than the more realistic image of hairless rats that are pretty damn fugly. What strikes me is that it's quite arbitrary, really. We can pretty much show that insects don't have brains in the same way that we do and just operate like thoughtless machines (unless you want to delve into some philosophical shit about "free will being an illusion", in which case; please don't) so why stop there and not afford rights to any living thing, including vegetables. You know, so it's unacceptable to end the life cycle of a small rodent, but it's perfectly fine to end the life of a carrot. 10:35, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * A few people do: fruitarians.  10:42, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Of course... also, would this need branching into the forum soon-ish or is it going to die off? 10:48, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

To go back to the premise, I don't wantonly kill anything - be they flies or kittens. And what's being an atheist got to do with it? So I'm not sure about the nature of the question.--BobSpring is sprung! 11:01, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Because atheism, by definition, holds a naturalistic morality. Therefore it's far more interesting to talk about that "my holy books sez pigs can't be eatin cuz theys diiirrty". 11:21, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Mmmm. Atheism, of and by itself, doesn't imply any sort of morality does it?--BobSpring is sprung! 12:08, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Creationists demanding more evidence
Ok, I admit I got the idea from our hated rival, LessWrong, but I think this merits discussing: Can creationists' demands for more evidence be denied based on the fact that the evidence is too difficult or expensive to procure combined with the fact that they have refused to consider the evidence already available? I think so. According to LW, what they are doing is called "motivated continuation," or asking for evidence because they want to cling to the hope that it will disprove evolution. (LW article here.) If we accept this conclusion, then, creatonists' demands for more evidence is not only obnoxious but also dishonest. But I think we knew that already. 21:57, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * "Hated rival" is a bit much, surely it's more like "teetotal and disapproving older brother" - but I digress. But I agree with the conclusion. It certainly seems like the main reason is this willful disregard of the current evidence. However, if the evidence hasn't convinced them so far there are two possibilities. 1) The evidence isn't actually convincing or well presented. This I'd be willing to consider, except we'd have to conclude that pretty much all of science is wrong and misguided. Or 2) that the standard of "evidence" that creationists want is unrealistic. This second option I think is borne out in reality, we see them wanting "evolution to be shown in the lab" but dismiss Lenski as "microevolution". Indeed, the whole rebranding of evidence as "just" microevolution and other duckings and divings seem to support this. 22:04, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The terms "disapproving older brother" and "hated rival" are largely synonymous, at least up to adolescence, which probably covers RW.  10:10, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, I like the "teetotal and disapproving older brother" metaphor much better. I think I'll add it to the article.
 * There is also a #3: creationists don't understand evolution in the first place, let alone what evidence best supports it. But for the most part I agree with #2. Creationists definitely demand unreasonable standards of evidence, like making abiogenesis happen in the lab. I should also add that they inflate the importance of evidence that "disproves" evolution, which is often coupled with a demand for additional evidence. 22:10, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The burden of proof for evolution lies with us. We have provided evidence. Instead of asking for more, the creationists should be providing solid evidence for their claims, which they don't do. 22:14, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Now that would be an interesting argument: demand that Kent Ham et al. donate their wealth to science if they are so concerned about the lack of evidence. I can only imagine how that would be received. 22:17, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, it'd be nice for them to try and back up their claims. But that's never happened and probably never will. We can discuss the nature of evidence until the cows are blue in the fact and come home to find that hell is suffering a cold spell, but the simple case is that to creationists the dichotomy is "if evolution is false, our specific creation myth must be true". Until that false dichotomy can be eliminated, we'll not see them actively do anything to directly back up their claims of a young Earth. 22:44, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The burden of proof for evolution has been fully and comprehensibly filled. However that is irrelevant for those whose beliefs are based on faith. It is not incumbent on science to provide more evidence, rather it is for creationists to provide any evidence for their side.--BobSpring is sprung! 11:07, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Precisely. 21:12, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

14 days without trial in the UK is a real bone of contention.
Well just look at this bill before the US Congress introduced by  Joe Lieberman and John McCain. The mind absolutely boggles! 12:51, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Goodness me! That is some scary shit!  17:17, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I recall reading that it's not the President but some sort of panel of experts (not BotP, unfortunately) who have to declare the defendant an enemy combatant or whatever, so there's a teeny bit of oversight here, but it is pretty fucking scary. Still, I don't think the bill has much of a chance. I'd like to think they can't get a majority, much less a filibuster that at least one of our better senators would have to give it (come on Sanders, Feingold, or one of you guys). I still have enough hope for Obama that he would veto it if it ever got that far. Please tell me my hopes are not misplaced. DickTurpis (talk) 18:31, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I think it would take another 9/11 to create the environment of hysteria required to pass shit like that. You know, like the PATRIOT ACT and the Blowing Up Iraq bill.  01:07, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Besides, the thing has violation of the 6th amendment written all over it. I suppose they could try to circumvent it by denying it's a criminal prosecution, but I don't think they can get 5 justices to tag along for that ride. DickTurpis (talk) 02:55, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

allbabiesareatheists could use some help from anyone who watches youtube videos
There are still some categories in the RANT awards that don't have any nominees. If anyone knows an appropriate non-theist youtuber, please nominate them: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ME8qYTf69Go --75.104.110.197 (talk) 12:57, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, Mustex, but: [[image:Yawn.gif]] 13:31, 16 May 2010 (UTC) TerrySmall.png [[Image:Toast s.png|alt=Toast|text-bottom|20px|link=User talk:SusanG]]

Fox News: Robin Hood Was a Teabagger
It is clear someones mommy never read them bedtime stories. Besides, teabaggers are more interested in taking from the poor to give to the rich. They are not Robin Hood, the Wild Colonial Boy or any other character in that genre.--Thanatos (talk) 14:14, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, I can't imagine how anyone could come to this conclusion. Surely a teabagger Robin Hood would hire on with the Sheriff as one of his paid thugs, and let the wealth trickle down. -- 14:26, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, some versions had Robin & crew being pretty anti-(Norman)-immigration, so I can kinda see it... --Kels (talk) 14:37, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * "If there’s a sub-plot where Robin Hood professes the necessity of “equal outcomes,” I certainly haven’t read it. Maybe it’s my mere fourth-grade reading equivalency getting the best of me, but nowhere in the book do I see the Prince of Thieves even suggest any sort of higher or additional taxes. Have leftists even read the story, or did they just opt to rent the Disney version instead?"  What the hell "book" is this cretin talking about?  As if there's one definitive version of the Robin Hood story.  14:51, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I noticed that the writer is a comedian. Deep-Cover Parody?--Thanatos (talk) 15:18, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Surely for this point to even stand Robin Hood has to be a real individual exactly as described in the legend? 21:29, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Fuck "the book." I saw the Kevin Costner movie like 5 times and he definitely steals from some rich people. As I recall, his gripe with the Sheriff of Nottingham was personal, since he killed his father or something. And if there's one definitive source in the world, it's a Kevin Costner movie. (See also: JFK, Thirteen Days, The Postman...) DickTurpis (talk) 21:34, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I improved your List of Truth, DT. 01:09, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Now now, The Postman is a different animal entirely. While Robin Hood, JFK and Thirteen Days chronicled past events with 100% accuracy, The Postman predicts future events with 100% accuracy. But we won't know this for sure for quite some time. You're getting ahead of yourself, Human. DickTurpis (talk) 01:36, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * That's as may be so, but Tom Petty still being cool in the future proves my case. Deny that and lose all curdability. 02:19, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * You forgot Waterworld. Also, Tom Petty, like Keith Richards, will appear unchanged a hundred years from now, and continue releasing albums.  No one seriously disagrees with this.  --Kels (talk) 02:26, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

NutJob vs. Screwball
This is Hilarious! Beck Vs Bill. Not sure who is in the right. Add to Glenn Beck article?--Thanatos (talk) 15:23, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Exams
In two weeks. I looked at the past papers and shat myself. Fuuuuuccccccckkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk. EddyP (talk) 17:28, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * On the bright side, however, doing the papers is the best way to revise. At this stage you want to know what you don't know, not what you do know. 17:58, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * If it's any consolation Eddy, I've finished all my exams. What Armond said. 20:43, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Also remember that once your exams are done, you can drink. Lots. 21:15, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It could be far worse. It could be two days before the exams. You've two weeks, and as Arm said, the past papers should be pretty useful. Realistically if you've covered to understand the past papers then you should be cool. Failing that, let's go in to the 419 scam business. -- ConcernedResident aerodynamics for the ladies 21:48, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Back during my college days (I won't say when that was, the Assfly himself was just out of college, the President's initials were "RR", and we often saw herds of brontosauri grazing on "The Hill" on campus), the instructor for one class I took gave a quiz a week, and then the final exam. When I was reviewing for the final, I said to myself, "a-ha! If he put it on the quizzes, he must consider it important. Therefore, to study for the final, I just need to review the quizzes. QED."
 * Unfortunately, the instructor apparently thought, "a-ha! If I've not covered it in the quizzes, I'd better cover it in the final, to make sure they understand it. QED."
 * As it worked out, I understand the material well enough anyway to pass the final and the course, but it was not a fun exam to to take.
 * Then there was my final final -- the last exam I took as an undergrad -- that I did so badly in I was convinced I failed the course, and would not graduate.... MDB (talk) 10:55, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

w
I miss Mei :(

Totnesmartin (talk) 20:15, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

I miss Mei :(

02:24, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * ;__________; 21:19, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

21:22, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Same here. I suppose it's the problem with online communities. People drift around, and sometimes it just happens in such a way that there's no real ending. There's someone I met online many years back, and I regret my temporary absence because by the time I returned she was gone. Enough melodrama for the night. I need to spend less time pondering. Ah well. -- ConcernedResident cow for the ladies 21:28, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It;s too soon for that kind of talk. Mei's disappeared a couple of times before & reappeared later.   21:33, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I believe Mr Weasel is wise. Martin, treat yourself to a Drambuie from the bar. There's a packet of crisps behind the fruit machine, and they're yours if you can fish them out. -- ConcernedResident hailstone for the ladies 21:46, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Might just be real world pressures. Exams are coming up. She might have gotten a new job. Mine is really eating up all of my time. Wait till summer and she might be back.--Thanatos (talk) 22:35, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll have to wait until summer anyway, I'm offline in a week and need to buy stuff for the new place. Like a bed. Totnesmartin (talk) 08:26, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm patiently awaiting Mei_III. &mdash; Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 19:40, 17 May 2010 (UTC)