# RationalWiki:Saloon bar/Archive167

This is an archive page, last updated 24 July 2012. Please do not make edits to this page.

## Uh,...

Anyone else see this? --Revolverman (talk) 01:46, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

No. Тytalk 01:51, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
It appears to be a cat sticking its head out of a box instead of osci-blahblahblah--"Shut up, Brx." 02:07, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
For anyone that didn't catch it, it normally looks like this. No cat, no box.--"Shut up, Brx." 02:27, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
I like the cat better. Sam Tally-ho! 02:37, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
I don't know. It's in a weird position, makes it look unnatural.--"Shut up, Brx." 02:38, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm intrigued. Can't see any tampering with the file or abstract which could have caused this. Revolverman, are you seeing this at http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Main_Page, or some other location? If it's still there, click on the image & see what the file name/location is. WēāŝēīōīďMethinks it is a Weasel 11:36, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Also, is your computer running some sort of internet filter? Is there a web content filter that replaces images of quack pharmaceuticals with adorable kittehs? Because if there is, I want it. WëäŝëïöïďMethinks it is a Weasel 11:42, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

What do you see here?
My guess would be some weird caching thing, but I can't see how that would happen like this. rpeh •TCE 12:15, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
This is what I'm seeing. This is getting seriously weird. ŴêâŝêîôîďMethinks it is a Weasel 13:10, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
Maybe you need new glasses. --2.36.64.127 (talk) 17:40, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
RationalWiki isn't a secure service. You can download a program off the web that would let a moderately intelligent younger brother prank their entire family's shared Internet connection by replacing images in (unsecured) web pages. Find whichever family member / colleague / flat mate / other customer at the coffee shop is pranking you and punch them in the arm, problem solved. 82.69.171.94 (talk) 17:53, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── You may have a virus. See this page asap. rpeh •TCE 18:05, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Unlikely. DNSChanger wasn't pranking people when it was active, it was 'serious business' defrauding advertising companies. Now that it's defunct and the servers are being run down by the Internet Systems Consortium that's even less likely to result in pranking. When you see the trollface image, think schoolboy prankster not criminal mastermind. 82.69.171.94 (talk) 19:50, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Well, its back to normal. Still no clue, and it only happend here. Huh. --Revolverman (talk) 19:54, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Someone on your network having a play with Anti's "replace images" PoC function? CrundyTalk nerdy to me 08:57, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

## How accurate is this demotivator?

http://knowyourmeme.com/photos/343989-us-healthcare-reform-obamacare Thoughts?Ryantherebel (talk) 16:48, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

The numbers may be right or not, but without comparable numbers in the US, it's meaningless. And there should be one for the US reflecting wait times for the uninsured, each of which would read "forever". DickTurpis (talk) 16:58, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
Actually, I doubt those numbers are accurate. 126 days for an MRI? That would fluctuate greatly depending on the circumstances. Sometimes such procedures need to be done right away, and I really doubt someone in the ER is going to wait 4 months. DickTurpis (talk) 17:02, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
They're all for procedures where the patient was referred. That is, they met their GP, the GP decided they needed to see a specialist and wrote a referral letter, then the specialist offered an appointment, the patient visited the specialist and either the procedure occurred immediately or a further appointment was made to actually perform a procedure. Hence they're measured in days or weeks. I've been referred in an hour before, but that's exceptional. So, not emergencies, but not necessarily what you as a layman would think of as "non-urgent" care. 82.69.171.94 (talk) 17:31, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
Whether they're accurate or not is pretty immaterial. The only valid figure is outcomes where the US performs OK, until you add in the cost factor. In short, if you find you have cancer or ingrowing toenails then the outcome is pretty much the same throughout the western world but it's going to cost you most in the states. Oh, and don't be poor and ill in the US. Bad Faith (talk) 17:43, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
I really wouldn't much much stock in the medical veracity of something that purports to list "common surgical procedures" and lists "MRI", "CT Scan" and that highly specific surgical procedure, "Prostate Cancer". pathetic 17:59, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
I imagine the source is [1] but the original data is no clearer in how it divides things up. It's a lot of work to precisely define what you wanted to count, and often it's just not worth the bother. 82.69.171.94 (talk) 19:06, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
I'm suprised no one has pointed out the completly misleading "trend" this graph is showing. The graph shows an increasing of waiting times as you move right but the bottom axis isint in any kind of order and therefore the "trend" is meaningless. The bottom axis should be in alphabetical order or something, but it's order is determined by the end results to try and imply a trend where none exists and to make the data look more dramatic. Ydam (talk) 19:47, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
Dick made the best point, frankly. Even if the chart is 100% accurate and it takes 291 days to get knee replacement surgery, that's still better than "you don't ever get a new knee because you're too poor to afford it". X Stickman (talk) 20:18, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

I think many of you are missing the point. The bill Obama passed was nothing like the Canadian system, and the Canadian system is not the only type of Universal Health Care system in the world. The argument is a strawman at its finest. Mr. Anon (talk) 01:05, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

I don't think that point is entirely lost, but if we assume the comparison (or lack of, in fact) was valid there'd still be numerous problems. sshole 10:24, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

I am loving this so much. I want to marry it and make little conspiracy theories with it. --Rutherford (talk) 14:11, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Personally, I'm looking forward to the spectacle of a man going though an entire presidential campaign without ever outlining a single concrete policy he'd try to implement if elected. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 18:42, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

## Jesus, Take the Wheel Day.

Awesome bit of satire. Theory of Practice Peer-reviewed articles for everybody! 16:33, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Though the apparently serious comments of "yeah, you stupid Christians, do it so you all die!!!!!" are both disappointing and disturbing. pathetic 17:03, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
I wonder if this was the same group...

## The Onion is losing to reality.

Not The Onion. Please rich douchebags, tell us more about how it's a shame Obama isn't doing more to help your looting. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 18:50, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Surely, when you're entertaining rich campaign donors it just proves you want the money to be elected for the sake of being elected. Otherwise you'd be out there canvassing with people who were representative of the actual majority of your people. gnostic 20:00, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Ugh, who'd want to party with them? --Kels (talk) 20:03, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
From personal experiences, the parties of the upper crust aren't worth going to, at least not here. Тytalk 20:08, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
The wealthy have better ways to... a-hem... experience altered states at parties. The regular people are more fun to be with when everyone is in an altered state, though. 20:14, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
(ECx2) Actually, I disagree. Candidates entertaining rich donors is a political necessity, because without the money they don't stand a chance of election. A sitting senator has to raise an absurd amount of money every week - something in the order of tens of thousands, probably more, but I can't recall exactly - just for their re-election bid, no matter how populist their aspirations. For Presidents it's much worse. Go America! Still a city on a hill! 20:10, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
"I just think if you're lower income -- one, you're not as educated, two, they don't understand how it works, they don't understand how the systems work, they don't understand the impact." Quick, ship the looters off to the Randroid Re-Education Camp! Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 20:54, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

## I've done it

I have found, without a doubt, the most retarded man in Congress. More retarded than Michele Bachman or Rand Paul. His name is Krayton Kerns. Just read that page. I'm utterly speechless. But that's only what he boasts on his front page. This is the craziest I've seen. Please tell me he's a Poe. Please, please. Mr. Anon (talk) 00:54, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

The United States must be the only first world country with a legislator who runs a blog entitled "Ramblings of a Conservative Cow Doctor." Sam Tally-ho! 02:12, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
To be fair, we are the largest and most diverse first world country. But I still feel ashamed that people like this guy being at the same level as people like Barney Frank and Dennis Kucinich. Mr. Anon (talk) 04:28, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Our political diversity only applies to the far right, though. The members of Congress most usually referred to as leftists really can only take positions that would be centrist in, say, most of Europe. And as for the couple you mentioned: Frank is retiring next year; and Kucinich was gerrymandered out of his district. At least Bernie Sanders will probably still be around, though he's getting up there in age...
By the way, that guy's surely crazy, but those positions are pretty standard for Republicans in red state legislatures (he's not in Congress). Q0 (talk) 08:49, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Fortunately, Frank and Kucinich aren't the only progressives in Congress, just the most vocal. There's still nearly 80 members of the Progressive Caucus. Mr. Anon (talk) 01:27, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
This guy is not in Congress. He is in a state legislature. In Montana, that means he has to impress probably twelve people.--talk 12:24, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
There's a huge element at this level that only the loons get elected because only the loons can be bothered to go through the political process. It's the same here with Union reps. The regular, middle of the road, union member cannot be bothered to go to all the union meetings, and all the rest of the palaver, so it's only the hot heads that stand and the union gets a reputation of being rabid. Bad Faith (talk) 12:31, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Not only that... since redistricting is now done with computers, you can set up electoral districts that are very heavily Democratic or Republican. Since a member of party X is pretty much guaranteed to win in a district now, you don't have to be moderate to attract swing voters anymore. So, that makes it easier for nutters to be elected. MDB (talk) 14:39, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
And incidentally be the ones to appoint the people who are in charge of the next redistricting efforts. A one way track to your very own sort of rotten boroughs. Wonderfully 19th century. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 18:55, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Ah, he's just a state legislature. OK, I feel better now. Looks like Rand gets back his spot as the most retarded. Mr. Anon (talk) 01:26, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
The word you wanted is legislator, legislature refers to the entire body of people and sometimes (as a metonym) to a place where that body conventionally meets. 82.69.171.94 (talk) 11:51, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

## This is good to see

Thoughts? Mr. Anon (talk) 01:29, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Should I feel bad that my first thought when I read the first sentence was "Is this just a joke?" But yeah, this is the type of Christianity I like to see. Sam Tally-ho! 01:32, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
For all Americans that have wondered what the Christian mainstream looks like in Europe: this is it. --Rutherford (talk) 05:02, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
What a lot of Americans forget is that you don't have to be atheistic to be secular. Mr. Anon (talk) 05:06, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
"Chris Ians for a Change", eh? Never heard of this fellow before. He some minor celebrity I don't know about? DickTurpis (talk) 05:09, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
I swear to god I thought that said Chris Chan for a Change. I've spent WAY too much time on the internet. --Revolverman (talk) 06:45, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Now this is where antitheism gets into problems. Osaka Sun (talk) 05:58, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Not necessarily. You will note that these "Christians for Change" do not manage to make a single reference to the Bible on the page outlining their creed. You will also note how they say "Faith in Christ's Love" instead of "Faith in Christ." My guess is that they believe in the broad message of Jesus's teachings, but are not quite so enthusiastic when it comes to believing that he was God incarnate. ListenerXTalkerX 06:51, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
My guess is that it's more to attract progressive Christians from a wide range of denominations. They're focusing on social teachings, not theology.
Also note that the web site linked to above is for the PAC started by these folk. MDB (talk) 12:03, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
The antitheist position is that the caring & sharing side of religion still enables the more negative side: if you use religious faith as a justification for tolerance & progress, then you could just as easily use it as a justification for hate & suppression; neither is more valid than the other if they are both religiously justified. This is quite a big theme in The God Delusion. WeaseloidMethinks it is a Weasel 20:00, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
From where I am standing, that still takes an overly Abrahamic view of things. The nasty part of the Abrahamic religions is not the theism, but the insistence that everyone in the world needs to hew to a given orthodoxy. This feature is also seen in some atheistic political ideologies (communism, for example) but is entirely absent in many religions.
Liberal Christianity is, as Prof. Dawkins said at one point, an "inoculation" against the nastier forms; but not everyone is inoculated, and inoculating everyone would rather defeat the point. ListenerXTalkerX 23:11, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Gateway religion could probably do with an expansion in that sort of direction. pathetic 08:51, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
Just to point it out, mainline protestantism in the U.S. DOES teach that not everyone needs to hew to a given orthodoxy. Both the McCormick Seminary and Lutheran School of Theology of Chicago teach both value pluralism and religious pluralism. — Unsigned, by: ORavenhurst / talkDo You Believe That? 13:32, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

## Cracked does it again

WTF, Stalin? Osaka Sun (talk) 05:58, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Oh jesus, Bill Clinton, wat? Ochtonaprincepsnot a pokémon 09:39, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Just think - if they'd distributed pictures of Hitler on a sled at the Nuremburg rally, WW2 would never have happened. --PsyGremlinKhuluma! 09:54, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Holy hell. Hitler on a sled and WTF CHURCHILL?! --جئت ورأيت أنا القرف gross, isn't it? 10:25, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
The first one did it for me. Although Einstein lounging was a close second.Ryantherebel (talk) 13:05, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
I'm a little bemused that the Cracked audience are surprised that these people are, at the end of the day, people. Even Hitler had time off from being Dr Evil. The worst concentration camp guards went home and cuddled their kids. Yeah, Bill Clinton had long hair in the 70's - we all did. Nothing to see here. Bad Faith (talk) 13:46, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

## Liquefy?

It's about time we put LQT in the Saloon Bar. Maybe have a separate Pub (old) and Nightclub (LQT)? Bootmiiwanna play nomic? 00:08, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Oh hey Lumenos (or otherwise Lumenoid individual). 01:40, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
That would be the worst idea ever. LQT sucks ass, and is awful to navigate and archive. ħuman 08:28, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

I oppose this in the strongest terms possible. Doctor Dark (talk) 16:01, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Not until LQT is reconciled to enhanced recent changes. The Saloon Bar is so active, RC will be clogged constantly with each new post. And getting the browser to save text that hasn't been submitted yet would be a major plus, especially since we always block each other around here.--"Shut up, Brx." 16:42, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Absolutely no effing way. Sophiebecause liberals 16:19, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

I vote no as well. Sam Tally-ho! 18:04, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
Nope. And I even sorta like LQT. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 18:10, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
Sweet Jesus, that's a horrible idea. Theory of Practice Peer-reviewed articles for everybody! 18:15, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
No. Just no, without the faintest glimmer of negotiability. Sprocket J Cogswell (talk) 23:07, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Which troll drag this out of the back alley where it had been rightly ignored for 2 months? And why after 2 months did Human dignify this idiocy with a response? For fuck's sake I am sure some of you just enjoy the drama. - π 03:10, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Sophie; He doesn't give two shits; Probably. 03:13, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
I didn't realize it was two months old. Funny.--"Shut up, Brx." 04:35, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

## Tea party thing? Freeman thing?

Republican quits mainstream politics to form her own government, sorta. Is this a new trend? and old trend? or just one stupid woman? --GodotQu'un sang impur abreuve nos sillons 18:02, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Looks like sovereign citizen stuff to me. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 18:08, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
Looks like sedition to me. Theory of Practice Peer-reviewed articles for everybody! 18:14, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
I look forward to reading about her arrest for tax evasion. -- Seth Peck (talk) 23:11, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
I'll make the popcorn if you guys bring the drinks. I look forward to hearing her delicious bugfuck arguments about how, like, Clause 37(b) of Section 5 of the Food and Drug Administration's 1977 bulletin on what crops [totally just made that up] means that she is not a taxable entity under the Constitution so HA. And the judge's pained expression as he realizes he's going to have to deal with this woman for several days before he can throw the book at her. Ochotonaprincepsnot a pokémon 09:56, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

## LIBOR scandal

Our financial wizards never fail to amaze. Taibbi has a series of posts starting here. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 02:45, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

I come from a family of financiers. Nothing surprises me anymore. That being said, hopefully this scandal will force top bankers to realize that no, they can't capture every regulator and no, they can't get away with every way to cheat the system to make more money. 04:58, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
Homo economicus comes crashing down again. Osaka Sun (talk) 05:40, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
It's interesting that the US actually warned the Bank of England some time ago that "we just trust whatever they tell us" isn't a sane approach to constructing a rate like LIBOR. I couldn't understand at first how that had been allowed to happen, and then I found out LIBOR rates sometimes track numbers that are purely theoretical anyway. "If you had to lend Tiny Bank some Venusian Plinks, what would the rate be?" "Um, but we didn't lend them any?" "No trouble, just guess". "Uh, let's say 4.26?" "Hooray, the Tiny Bank Venusian Plinks component of LIBOR is up 1% compared to yesterday". So they couldn't insist on any standard of evidence because by their own admission the numbers were sometimes completely fictitious anyway. Idiots. 82.69.171.94 (talk) 15:18, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
The trippy bit is you can probably buy Tiny Bank Venusian Plinks derivatives based on that value, even if no one ever lends them money. - π 03:47, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
I have a sneaking suspicion that the entire worldwide financial system is based upon theoretical constructs of fictitious numbers into vast systems of fictitious transfers of fictitious money. 03:03, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
When I have had the misfortune of teaching financial modelling courses the big problem I have is trying to get the students head around the idea that nobody ever takes possession of the things they buy. The common example is if you buy 1000 options to buy at $20 and at expiry the stock is worth$21, then you just get $1000, you don't have to ever have to be able to purchase the 1000 shares for$20000, or for them to even be available at that price for you to buy. - π 03:45, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
Ahhh, we're into the world of perfect and imperfect wp:arbitrage, where conspiracy theories run amok. nobsCorporations are people, too 03:40, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
Not the entire system Blue, but the same applies as in writing software and probably many other things in life. There is a handy abstraction (say, a financial instrument like a Credit Default Swap) but abstractions are leaky, so it is vital that you understand what's actually going on beneath the abstraction, even if you still regard the abstraction as useful. If you begin to think of the abstraction as real itself, you will get burned. Lots of people at investment banks had begun to imagine that the abstractions they dealt with were real, but perhaps worse ordinary people who don't think of themselves as financial experts have begun to believe in instruments like mortgages, insurance policies, etc. without grokking those abstractions either. My parents nearly lost their house because they wrongly believed the endowment they'd signed up to was guaranteed to pay off their loan but in fact it was only ever projected to pay off, and in their case the estimates were badly wrong.
Of course this situation is also, to a point, responsible for our whole modern civilisation. Fiat money is an abstraction, and having the populace understand why it's a good idea is a lot more effort than just letting people coast along believing that the coins in their pocket are valuable but not knowing why. Probably it would be useful if we all spent a bit more time acting like a small child and following every answer to our questions with a further, "But why?" 82.69.171.94 (talk) 09:53, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

## You know who I miss?

Carptrash. Whatever happened to that guy? Theory of Practice Years of being an atheist: 30. Instances of persecution on that account: 0. 13:41, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Compared to the weirdos who came after him, he's almost normal, and at least he played nice. Perhaps he can give us a wave if he's lurking. Sophiebecause liberals 15:36, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
Last edited early 2009. Time sure does fly. WéáśéĺóíďMethinks it is a Weasel 18:42, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

## Raspberry Pi

So my Raspberry Pi's came in...now what? I'm thinking about installing one in the car. Any other ideas? I'm kicking around the idea of making my cat a cyborg. Occasionaluse (talk) 15:15, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

## Child forced to wear a dog shock collar and live in a chicken coop

The case hasn't come to court yet but it should be worth watching out for it. Proxima Centauri (talk) 17:23, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

one thing that shockes me is how many neighbors saw things, and said nothing. huh? You see a kid lugging rocks up a road in "bad shape" you report it.--GodotQu'un sang impur abreuve nos sillons 17:39, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
Side effect of the individualistic culture in this country, especially in certain areas like rural environments: other people's business isn't yours. Even when it should be. ±KnightOfTL;DRcritical thinking is the key to success! 17:42, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
I don't like being nosy, but wrong is wrong. If I ever saw something like this I would call the appropriate authorities. -- Seth Peck (talk) 17:58, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
If they were really doing what the Bible told them to, the kid probably would have been dead a long time ago. Occasionaluse (talk) 17:59, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
Maybe they thought somebody else had reported it? We talked about this in a psychology class, that people won't because they think somebody else will, or they just don't want to get involved. il'Dictator Mikal 19:03, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
Yes yes, we all know the story about Kitty Genovese from PSYC 1001 or The Boondock Saints or The Watchmen. There's a reason why it's not a great excuse. -- Seth Peck (talk) 20:59, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
I shouldn't have laughed at that... pathetic 18:03, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

## OMG particle

Give it up, atheists! Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 19:57, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

It burns!!! Occasionaluse (talk) 20:54, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
God of the gaps in perfection. --Rutherford (talk) 21:15, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
I'm tempted to put this in the External links section of conservatism. Almost all of them appear to be serious. Osaka Sun (talk) 21:24, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
"Jesus is the only God particle in my life...and the bible the only particle accelerator i need." Though, considering this is by someone called "@notkirk_cameron", I doubt it's sincere. 23:35, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

## This'll help with arguing and citing

Because I'm peed off with being charged ridiculous sums to read a paper. Sophiebecause liberals 07:29, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

So what does this mean for any of research joint funded by both industry and public research councils? bomination 09:38, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
As an alumni of Manchester University (yes, the same physics department as Brian Cox!) I recently discovered that they are currently providing free online access to JSTOR. ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 14:17, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
If you are in the US, most State Universities offer public library cards, and with those, you can access their article references pages. You can't provide a link online, of course, but you can at least read them - which is something.GodotQu'un sang impur abreuve nos sillons 16:59, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
About time. Science for the people! Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 22:41, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
But you've met people, right? pathetic 09:42, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
I met one once. He lives in my bathroom mirror. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 00:45, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
I also forgot, if I'm going to mention Science for the People, the obligatory REDSREDSREDSREDSREDSREDS!!!!!! Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 00:47, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
My uni (Liverpool) has free reference access to the public, which surprised me. Down in London most of the Uni of London colleges (where I was before coming ooop north) charged a fortune for public access, and even then you still didn't get access to electronic resources at most of the libraries. Anything which makes research more publicly accessible is a step in the right direction, and from the article, I'm glad to read the EU is considering a union wide move in this direction. -- 18:07, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

## Michael Moore is intellectually dishonest.

I've never gotten over my profound disappointment in the Big Man, whose early work I loved, after he decided that it was okay to lie if it served his agenda. Specifically, it was one of the centerpiece arguments in Bowling or Columbine, the idea that Canadians own guns but school shootings are somehow an American problem, that ended my love affair with Big Mike. Really Mike? Really? You sure, Mike?. At least this guy waited until after you won the Academy Award for your mendacious work. Reason I bring this up? Another non-existent gun-related tragedy in Soviet Canuckistan. Guns. I hate them. Theory of Practice Years of being an atheist: 30. Instances of persecution on that account: 0. 16:18, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Wait before making a political analysis on this. I'm a Torontonian myself, and by all accounts these past few months have been rare. Gun crime rates are significantly lower up here regardless. Osaka Sun (talk) 16:39, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
No doubt gun crime rates are lower. But to make a movie about school shootings and use Canada as an example of a gun culture that works while ignoring its own school shootings was reprehensible. And that lower rate doesn't make me hate guns any the less in the first place. Theory of Practice Years of being an atheist: 30. Instances of persecution on that account: 0. 16:54, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
And arguably Coloumbine is fairly well-researched and balanced in comparison to what he did afterwards. sshole 18:11, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
I don't think Moore makes any claims of being balanced, does he? I sort of see his movies as presenting one side of an argument, which is fine, if that's what you admit you're doing. I think of a movie like Sicko the way I think of a prosecutor in a criminal case; they present the evidence that supports their position, but leave the counter arguments to others. I think Sicko does a decent job of presenting problems with the US healthcare system, but does a terrible job of presenting problems with the alternatives, instead making France seem like the land of milk and honey. But we hear about all the evils of socialized medicine from enough places that I guess we don't need him to tell us them as well. Just don't watch his movies thinking your getting a balanced argument. DickTurpis (talk) 22:03, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
Isn't the fact, that he is selling his movies as "documentaries" kind of contradicting your argument? I was under the impression that documentaries were supposed to be kind of impartial. Don't get me wrong; I support Moore's standpoint but everything he did after Columbine was just purest partisan propaganda--Th. Bernhard (talk) 22:16, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
I'm not sure that "documentary" implies "NPOV". I don't read it that way, at least. They are nonfiction and are supposed to be basically factually accurate, but that doesn't mean they don't conveniently leave out facts that don't support their hypothesis. Yes, a very good documentary will be largely impartial, but I wouldn't call Moore's films the paragon of the genre. DickTurpis (talk) 22:21, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
I had many many discussions about the NPOV of documentaries. All of them kinda pointless. I would say this: A documentary filmmaker may of course hold his/her own views, but they should not be forced upon the viewer. One of my most favourite documentaries is Fog of War. I've seen Errol Morris talk rather badly about McNamara, but his documentary leaves me the option to make my own decision about McNamara. That's something Moore rarely does. Btw: One of the scenes of Fahreheit that irritated me the most was about members of Congress volunteering their children. Would that even be legal in the US?--Th. Bernhard (talk) 22:39, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Having a point of view is fine. Leaving out easy-to-access information that directly contradicts the argument you are trying to present is what we call "lying." Theory of Practice Years of being an atheist: 30. Instances of persecution on that account: 0. 00:09, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

I was also a huge fan but I lost faith in him with Farenheit 9/11. When I found myself defending Bush against his accusations, I knew he had gone WAY too far. (Case in point - "Ohmigod! The Secret Service are guarding the Saudi Embassy! What dubious, dodgy business is going on here???". Um, yeah the Secret Service also guard all of the other embassies, that's part of their freaking job. It's a requirement under Article 22 of the 1961 Vienna Convention, thus the Australian Federal Police guard all the embassies in Australia, etc. VOXHUMANA 00:58, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

To echo Theory of Practice's point: I Hate Guns. 82.69.171.94 (talk) 01:29, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Yeesh... dare I ask what people think of John Pilger documentaries? Q0 (talk) 23:40, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Oh course he is intellectually dishonest, he is Michael Moore. Talsley (talk) 23:43, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

## Hollywood values redux

Since The Dark Knight Rises will be in theatres by the end of the week I'd suggest we start cracking down on "Christopher Nolan is pushing PATRIOT" and other claims.

See WIGO:World. Batman is now an Obama propaganda series to the far-right, apparently. Osaka Sun (talk) 01:15, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Kryptonite is a threat to God's intelligent design! — Unsigned, by: 99.235.129.26 / talk / contribs

The issue has been raised at CP.
A few points as a comic book fan:
• Bane has been a Bat-villain for nearly twenty years now.
• He's already appeared in a Batman movie -- the abysmally bad Batman and Robin from 1997
• The writer who created the character (Chuck Dixon) is a conservative Republican, and one report I've read says he's concerned about the name similarity hurting Romney. MDB (the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear) 12:47, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

## Trolling Shell

Sorry to just linkspam, but this is brilliant. Basically, Shell are trying to crowdsource a new advert, and the Internet has responded beautifully. I don't imagine it'll stay up for long... rpeh •TCE 10:15, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

How is it brilliant? Because it fooled you into thinking it was actually by Shell? It's apparent that this does not require brilliance. It's crudely done and I'm surprised it survived a second glance. Or maybe you didn't give it one? 82.69.171.94 (talk) 10:32, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
No, because it's a damn funny parody of the real thing. Lord of Reckless Noise Hooray! I'm helping! 10:35, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
Meh, sure enough KYM has an entry on this attempted forced meme. The Yes Men correspondingly go further down in my estimation for working with Greenpeace on the campaign. Would they still be "culture jamming" if they made a video where a fake Obama aide seems to admit that he's a Muslim intent on enforcing Soviet style central government? How about if they did it for the Republican party? Or would that finally be the moment where somebody realises "You're just another PR agency". 82.69.171.94 (talk) 11:16, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
Because we burnt all the oil, and people still want plastics, dyes, medicines, coatings, fabric and so on, we need to go drilling for it in obscure places. This isn't entirely Shell's fault. theist 19:18, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
I have no idea what is going on above (troll quotes go?), but damn this is hilarious. Q0 (talk) 23:31, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

### Best. Trolling. Ever.

Srsly, get there before they catch on. Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 18:55, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Update: Poe'd Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 18:59, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

## Oy Vey.

There's this idea floating around in my (WOEFULLY UNEDUCATED) family (who's misson is to stop me from going to medical school) that "Obamacare" is causing doctors to quit in droves and clinics to be shut down. The supposed reason for the Systematic Destruction of Healthcare As We Know It is "doctors aren't getting paid anything anymore!!!" No other reasons were shared. Naturally, they heard this on Fox News. Do we have any healthcare professionals who'd like to comment and/or give me some choice quotes to explain WHY they're full of shit? :P 108.236.160.94 (talk) 15:31, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

With the health insurance mandate, doctors may very well be making more money, since more people will have health insurance. Actually, while I'm technically a healthcare professional, I'm not a doctor and I'm unemployed, so ignore what I said if you want an informed opinion--"Shut up, Brx." 15:38, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
"so ignore what I said if you want an informed opinion." Hammer. Nail. Head. Theory of Practice Years of being an atheist: 30. Instances of persecution on that account: 0. 16:04, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
We had that quote that was making the round on how 85 percent of doctors say ACA makes them want to quit, but when you actually looked at it was totally full of shit. Anyone have the link to that blog post dissecting it? Tmtoulouse (talk) 16:23, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
I'm sure there's a record somewhere about the same stories floating around when universal health care was introduced in other countries. I was quite young when it happened in Oz, but I remember hearing people talk about how "all the doctors are quitting" and there would be "people dying in the streets". Now not even the most extreme right-wing politician would dare to suggest dismantling it. VOXHUMANA 01:11, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
In 2022 someone will call the US health care system "Obamacare", (probably as a lark) and the Republicans of the day will rise in protest saying that it was NEVER called "Obamacare" until some democrat [sic] called it that trying to make it theirs, (the dems). C®ackeЯ 01:25, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
@Trent, I think you mean this post. rpeh •TCE 05:59, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Last time I checked doctors are some of the most well paid professions in any place anywhere, ie all of socialistic Europe, with some quite steep educational life investment in order to get there. if they are "quitting" I'd like to know what else the hell they are doing. Working in McDonalds? Sen (talk) 14:52, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
There was recent talk in the UK of doctors going on strike because of possible cuts to their £60K pensions, I can only dreeeaaam of a pension of that order, and I'm sure British docs are grossly underpaid in comparison to their US counterparts. ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 00:17, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
The doctors did in fact call a strike (those complying refused to do non-urgent work for 24 hours so e.g. too bad if you were scheduled to have elective surgery that day) yes. Bevan wrote that he had to "stuff their mouths with gold" when the NHS was founded, significantly increasing pay to experienced doctors under the NHS so that their professional organisations would cease to oppose it. The justification for striking over pensions was that senior civil servants (who made the pension decision) did not receive an equivalent hit to their own pensions. That is, other people's belts were tightened, but not the people making the decisions. British civil servants have a reputation for being rather self-serving, perhaps some of it due to instances like this, and a lot due to the popular BBC comedy dramas Yes Minister and Yes, Prime Minister. 82.69.171.94 (talk) 09:23, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
So adding 30 million healthcare consumers to the demand at a time when there's a shortage of 250,000 doctors in the United States will have no impact on cost or quality of care. Good. I get to spend 10 minutes with my doctor when I see him. Not adding a single doctor but 30 million more patients should cut that down to 30 seconds. That's called "improved efficiency". nobsCorporations are people, too 17:51, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
You're so hilarious, Rob. I wonder if you really think this is a bigger problem than the original fact of there being 30 million people in the country who don't even get that 10 minutes with a doctor in the first place. I also wonder what you think about countries with dirty communist healthcare systems such as Cuba, which has the second highest doctor to patient rate in the world, and a higher life expectancy than the US to boot. Let's allow the free market to decide who and how many go to medical school, eh? Q0 (talk) 22:19, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
That's a good point about Cuba. Once Castro being dead is certified as official, Cuban doctors will migrate enmasse to the US. This explains the reason for so many foreign born doctors (from Pakistan or India, for example) now in the United States. It's not that among 300 million idiots our public school system can't graduate enough qualified doctors even with Pell Grants and Student Loans, it's that foreign born doctors are motivated more by higher pay scales, greed, and the almighty dollar rather than some humanitarian desire to serve their fellow man members of the species. nobsCorporations are people, too 00:49, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

## Pioneer anomaly solved

"The unexpected slowing of NASA’s Pioneer 10 and 11 spacecraft – the so-called “Pioneer Anomaly” – turns out to be due to the slight, but detectable effect of heat pushing back on the spacecraft." Fight amongst yourselves. --PsyGremlinFale! 14:55, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

"Psygremlin" (what a ridiculous name), I've read your rant and I'm 95% certain that your clueless acceptance of relativity means you're a liberal who opposes classroom prayer. If you open your mind you will see that the theory of relativity is wrong. rpeh •TCE 15:10, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
You found me out, curses. It's all true - I oppose gun control in schools and eat babies for breakfast. --PsyGremlinTal! 15:17, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Funny, I oppose baby control in schools, and eat guns for breakfast. (The AK-47 needed salt this morning.) MDB (the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear) 15:41, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
What kind of heathen puts salt on an AK-47? That's a steel barrel, use mayonnaise bitches. 82.69.171.94 (talk) 10:24, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

## 10 more to 6k

With ten more content pages, we can reach this next mark--"Shut up, Brx." 16:15, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

And Human has 18000 pages on his watch list. What am I missing?  Lily Inspirate me. 20:15, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Talk-centric (Saloon Bar, forums, debates, WIGOs) pages, redirects, templates, subpages, help pages, and maybe some other stuff--"Shut up, Brx." 20:53, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
so what? Quality before quantity please, before we start going "this site is growing rapidly." Sophiebecause liberals 10:58, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

## This is getting annoying

The Daily Fail just brought out the climate deniers again. Gore's Law erupts, and then the scientist in charge of the study tells the media to STFU. Osaka Sun (talk) 00:13, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Daily Fail? Sophiebecause liberals 10:56, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

## Stephen C. Meyer

I have created a lot of articles recently on ID guys and I think most of them have been debunked now there are very few mainstream ones left to cover however an article on Stephen C. Meyer is needed desperately, he is one of the mainstream ID guys but I don't see much criticism of his work. His Signature in the Cell book is a piece of creationist poop that needs shooting down. DinoCrisis (talk) 17:01, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I thought that was the person who wrote twilightAMassiveGay (talk) 17:56, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

## Attention: Obese atheists

Just a reminder to join our fitocracy group. I don't know if you still need a referral to join, but if you do you can use mine http://ftcy.me/MQvy6g If enough people join we might be able to have another challenge. - π 11:45, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

I just signed up (though I'm not an atheist. More of a nominal Christian leaning towards the agnostic.) I've just started walking regularly. I've been putting on weight since I quit smoking. MDB (the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear) 12:17, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
You just got your first follower. - π 12:30, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Odd that a fitness site accepts e-cigarette ads. MDB (the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear) 12:37, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Really? I use ad blocker so I haven't noticed. - π 12:43, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Really. There was one right on your page.
I did promise fitocracy I'd walk tonight, but I'm looking at the weather forecast. Feels like index of 99 degrees when I get home from work. MDB (the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear) 12:50, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Aight, I joined. Too bad I just lost 17kg since I quit smoking which hasn't been logged :(. --GTac (talk) 13:44, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
But I enjoy my general state of appalling health. gnostic 19:33, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Of course. You have no reason to live so why be healthy and prolong your existence? Talsley (talk) 23:45, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Considering that e-cigarettes are a healthier alternative to regular cigarettes and their primary market is existing tobacco smokers, this isn't too odd. (Aside: why 'electronic cigarettes' rather than 'electric cigarettes'? The latter is more logical and sounds steampunk-y.) --Tweenk (talk) 15:09, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
Indeed, electric cigarettes sound awesome. I want to taste the lightning. --GTac (talk) 05:49, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
E-cigs? Terrorist! Sophiebecause liberals 08:59, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

## Thought Michelle Bachmann couldn't get any crazier?

Think again! Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 17:19, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

That's not crazy, that's scary. She's basically advocating McCarthyism for Muslims. MDB (the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear) 18:08, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Not that that's anything new. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 18:18, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
On a related note, John McCain reminds us why he was once the Republican Democrats admired. MDB (the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear) 18:39, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
McCain is getting a lot of credit from teh eevil liebural media for this. I'd also like to raise a glass to him for taking the time to do something like this. rpeh •TCE 18:44, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
That's refreshing to hear from McCain. Unfortunately, he will probably die fighting the war on homosexuality, even after it's long over. Like one of those Japanese guys stranded on an island. Occasionaluse (talk) 19:10, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
McCain was once the one Republican that the commie libs loved. By the summer of 2008, he became Hitler reincarnated (n the same vein that Hitler's ghost had migrated from Nixon to Ford to Reagan to Poppy Bush to Bob Dole to GW Bush; it's currently in transit from McCain to Romeny.) nobsCorporations are people, too 22:48, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
You mean when he sold out everything be believed in try to placate the noisy minority on the far-right of his party and then picked/got saddled with (depending on who you ask) an unvetted nutcase as a running mate? Couldn't imagine why. Romney is lucky things have gone so bad for Obama that he is neck and neck, otherwise he would return an even poorer result then McCain. Tmtoulouse, and nobody else 12:29, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
I'm really looking forward to the MN political fights between her and Keith Ellison. I got a call from Ellison's office yesterday telling me to call Michelle Bachmann and tell her "that using scare tactics for political gain is not the American way!" Lord of Reckless Noise Hooray! I'm helping! 11:27, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Why didn't he just call her himself? Tmtoulouse, and nobody else 12:20, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Jesus, even John Boehner is trying hard to distance himself from this whole thing. Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 22:52, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

So Bachman's off the short list of VP choices; BFD. nobsCorporations are people, too 11:55, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Are you, or have you ever been, a member of the Communist Party, Rob? Ochotonaprincepsnot a pokémon 11:59, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
I was forced to join when I went under deep cover. One of the hazards of being a professional operative. But my heart was never in it. nobsCorporations are people, too 12:12, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Oh, you must be Robert-ski from the party meetings back in '88! Pleasure to see you again, comrade!
I always suspected you were an FBI plant. When you sang the Internationale it sounded too rehearsed. MDB (the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear) 12:31, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
I'm not sure if I should wooooosh Rob for missing my point, or if he gets it and is just playing along. Ochotonaprincepsnot a pokémon 12:39, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
So Rob's a plant? That explains the lack of intelligence. ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 15:54, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

## That gun thing

Home Office reports homicide rate at 30-year low. Good to know that atheistic Britain England and Wales are doing something right. ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 18:44, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Ironic, after you have the prior article suggesting god tells mexicans to shoot black kids. ;-) --GodotQu'un sang impur abreuve nos sillons 18:48, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
An Hisanic born in the United States is not a Mexicans. Neither are they a "Mexican-American". And refereeing to an Hispanic as Mexican some Hispanics would consider a racial slur. nobsCorporations are people, too 19:00, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
White Hispanic--99.108.68.168 (talk) 19:01, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
And yet so many of them (the vast majority in New Mexico, Arizona and Colorado) self identify as mexican.GodotQu'un sang impur abreuve nos sillons 19:38, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
Hispanics in New Mexico have been in New Mexico for 400 years. They are not now, nor have their forebears ever been, Mexican. nobsCorporations are people, too 20:25, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
Not even when New Mexico was part of Mexico? Sophiebecause liberals 20:54, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
Instead of telling us your bullshit of what YOU think, Rob, how bout actually talking to the people you are speaking for. I know here, there is a serious sense of pride in being Mexican. not hispanic (which still relates to the dominant Spain) but Mexican. "mexican american" often, but not "hispanic american". You make me laugh, cause you speak out of how you think the world should be, instead of how it is. GodotQu'un sang impur abreuve nos sillons 23:01, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
"A" hispanic, not "an" hispanic. I hate people who don't know the correct use of indefinite articles. If you pronounce the 'H" you use an "a". If you think there are exceptions like "an historic..." you are wrong. People used to write "an historic" because it used to be pronounced "'istoreek" (up until about WWI). However the pronunciation changed, but ignorant people thought they should keep using "an" because they were told to do so in outdated grammar textbooks. Likewise I write "a herb" and Americans write "an herb" reflecting the variance in pronunciation. VOXHUMANA 21:35, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
Jesus, it's no wonder nobody likes you. Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 23:09, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
Duuuuuuude. Am I on RW or WP here? There are bigger fish to fry in this discussion alone. Q0 (talk) 21:44, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
Are you trying to suggest that making a huge fuss about something completely trivial is in any way unusual on RW? :) VOXHUMANA 11:11, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Vox, this is a written medium, so how do you know how Rob is pronouncing "Hispanic"? Even on your own wrong terms, you are wrong.-- Kriss AkabusiAAAWOOOGAAAR!!1 09:08, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
If Rob is from northern England or Essex where the 'H' in 'hispanic' isn't aspirated - then I'll concede. (But of course, then he has a whole new set of problems, mainly, he comes from northern England or Essex). VOXHUMANA 11:10, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Alrite marra, calm doon, nowt wrang with up nerth. moral 13:51, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Whut ah ya'll tahkn ahbout? Тytalk 14:15, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
The most likely thing is that Rob puts on an exaggerated Spanish accent especially whenever he says the word "Hispanic". Rob can you confirm/deny?-- Kriss AkabusiAAAWOOOGAAAR!!1 15:03, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────For what it's worth, I used to work in a shopping mall in a primarily Spanish-speaking area, and there were a number of stalls there doing a brisk trade in t-shirts proclaiming that the wearer was Mexican, and emphatically NOT Hispanic, generally accompanied by an image of Zapata. Ethnicity is a complicated thing, even more so when you start ignoring and/or marginalizing the way people self-identify. — Unsigned, by: ORavenhurst / talkDo You Believe That? 17:23, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

You have to remember that the wing nuts always to get to define who is what; whether it be liberal, atheist, anti-American, commie, Christian or Mexican. ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 19:42, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Hispanic is a complicated thing where I live, commonly marked by four distinctly different uses of the Spanish language. First there's the local descendants of Conquistadors. Then there's the influx of a different localized dialect from California. Then there's Mexican brand of Spanish (which is basically divided between a Mexico City accent, and more provincial version; Hispanics from Texas and along the border share these). Then in recent years there's a fair sized Cuban community, which uses many different idioms from what is used in Mexico and the United States. nobsCorporations are people, too 20:26, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

## Zimmerman: It was God's plan to have me shoot an unarmed child.

Nice god you have there. Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 18:34, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

St. Skittles, a 6' tall child.--99.108.68.168 (talk) 18:47, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
The only way Jpratt could be a more disgusting human, is if he wrote that whilst raping a 6-year-old in his basement. --PsyGremlin話しなさい 09:33, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Irrelevant whether he was 6' gang member or a 9 year old.
Anyways, is Zimmerman retarded? In a list of things not to say in your own defence, this is in the Top 5. Osaka Sun (talk) 01:24, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
So he reiterates his apology to the Martin family, yet maintains that he wouldn't have done anything differently and that, basically, God wanted him to do it. Dafuq? Sam Tally-ho! 02:32, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Is he trying to establish that he's insane? --TheLateGatsby (talk) 13:15, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
The onion hit me pretty hard today. Occasionaluse (talk) 18:08, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

## I've been away for some time

Whatever happened to our good friend Jinx? I haven't seen anything from him. It seems that Rob has taken over as the site whack-job..... Such a shame, he can't hold a candle to Jinxy. SirChuckBEl...ipses are Cool... 15:24, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

IIRC he went off to answer God's call for him to minister to men. --PsyGremlinParla! 15:40, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Minister as in give comfort to? ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 15:57, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Jinx? That's going back a bit, right? bomination 16:10, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Every once in a while, I'll see a post from him on a few rightwing hateblogs I frequent. Occasionaluse (talk) 20:14, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Yeah he roams around a lot of fundie blogs and stuff, but he gets bored easily and doesn't stick around long. Cow...Hammertime! 20:23, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

## Worst job in the US this week

Aurora Police Chief Dan Oates barely keeping composure in a press conference. Osaka Sun (talk) 02:48, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

## Who should you support in the US Presidential Election?

Yes it's another of those answer-a-load-of-questions-and-get-told-who-you-should-support sites, but they're often interesting. I got a 96% match with the Greens, 89% Democrats, 84% Socialists, 43% Libertarian (!) and 7% Republican. I agree with Mitt Romney on "No major issues", which suits me fine. rpeh •TCE 10:12, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

56% Libertarian and 20% Republican? What the fuck happened?? bomination 10:23, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
92% Democrats, 91% Greens, 23% Libertarians. As expected. 10:28, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
But "Should Congress raise the debt ceiling?" is an incredibly stupid question. 10:30, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
Wait.... I just noticed one of the alternative answers is: "The Federal Reserve should destroy the \$1.6 trillion in government bonds it now holds." My God... does anyone actually endorse such a solution? That could crash the economy of the whole world! MDB (the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear) (talk) 16:36, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
Well, it's a government bond, so...Gold! Gold! Gold! Osaka Sun (talk) 16:59, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
Actually, that's just money that the treasury "owes" the Fed, i.e., money the government owes itself. It would be the most common sense thing to just rip them up -- they don't really have any purposes outside of internal accounting and some bonus bucks for the Fed from the interest on the bonds. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 01:02, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
86% Democratic, 83% Green, 51% Libertarian, 16% Republican. I come very close to Ron Paul on social issues, but we're radically apart on other issues. Which is that I've long noted about the Libertarians -- most people are very impressed with some of their stances, then they say "are you fucking crazy?" about some other stances. (And Ron Paul is an evolution denier? I knew he was a libertarian zealot, but I thought he was intelligent at least.) MDB (the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear) (talk) 11:52, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
Paul was always an evo denier.
Anyways, 97% Green, 88% Dems, 39% Libertarian and 13% Republican. I was stuck with the birth control question - isn't coverage by prescription the exact same as giving a Yes answer? Osaka Sun (talk) 16:59, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
For amusement value, I decided to imagine I was Bizarro MDB, and give answers as far removed from my personal opinions as they quiz would allow. Virgil Goode was my candidate of choice. MDB (the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear) (talk) 17:05, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
96% green, 86% Dem, 54% Libertarian, 13% GOP. Тytalk 17:08, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
75% Greens, 72% Dems, 31% Liberts, 7% Retards Republicans. --Rutherford (talk) 17:56, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
I find it interesting that my stance on evolution will change who I should vote for in this quiz, Also 85% democrat, 83% Green, 64% libertarian and 39% Republican, though Jill Stein was 2 points off from Obama (83 to 85) for who i should vote for--il'Dictator Mikal 18:03, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
86% Socialist, 82% Green, 71% Democratic, 5% Republican. I find it hard to believe I side with Obama anywhere near 71% of the time, though the others sound about right. Q0 (talk) 19:19, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────89% Libertarian, 84% Republican, 57% Democratic, 33% Green, I be the odd one here. :P--BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 20:14, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

87% Anarchist, 59% Astronaut, 0.4% Philatelist and 110% The Simpsons. What do I win? --2.34.113.53 (talk) 20:29, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

89% Democrat, 87% Green, 43% Libertarian, and 25% Republican Sam Tally-ho! 02:51, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

85% Republican, 83% Libertarian, 67% Democratic, 13% Green. I side with Mitt Romney 84%, Barack Obama 67%, and American Voters 58%. Pretty mainstream American, huh? nobsCorporations are people, too 03:13, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
Parties: 79% Democratic, 78% Green, 57% Libertarian, 7% Republican. Candidates: 79% Barack Obama, 78% Jill Stein, 46% Ron Paul, 7% Mitt Romney, 15% "American Voters" (whoever the fuck that is suppose to represent). - π 03:26, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
87% green, 83%- I didn't see the option for ending the class struggle by returning the means of production to the people and creating an egalitarian society where all share freely of the public bounty. I would have selected that one--"Shut up, Brx." 04:42, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
83% Green, 76% Democratic, 64% Libertarian, 28% Republican; although, I feel I should mention on a number of issues I had no opinion on or didn't know enough about to have an informed opinion, and since I couldn't "abstain", I just guessed my opinion. Also, apparently there are no Pirate Party Presidential candidates in the US, since they have they frickin' Rent Is Too Damn High guy on there of all people. I think I'd agree most with them. --CoyoteSans (talk) 05:05, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
82% Green, 81% Democratic, 69% Republican, 63% Libertarian. Likewise. Some of the questions I didn't even understand, like "Do you believe in the theory of evolution?" I mean, what sort of question is that? And a few others like those on USian healthcare I had to guess. Also there weren't any questions about Obama's muslimness or which country should they nuke next. Ajkgordon (talk) 07:55, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
I was 95% Green, 89% Democratic, 64% Libertarian and 13% Republican. This is weird since I would never vote for a Green politician. --Tweenk (talk) 16:04, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
The Green party in the US is less about environmentalism and more about democratic socialism. Honestly, I would have figured you for more of a libertarian. I'm pleasantly surprised--"Shut up, Brx." 17:37, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
83% Jill Stein, 79% Barack Obama, 74% Stewart Alexander, 59% Ron Paul, 21% Mitt Romney. I wanted Jimmy McMillan though. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 01:02, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
81% Green | 67% Democratic | 51% Libertarian | 18% Republican - 51% Lolbertarian?! WTF?! I'd rather gargle with my dogs puke. -- 18:16, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
According to the quiz, 93% Republican, 79% Libertarian, 31% Democrat, 7% Green. Talsley (talk) 23:48, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Well, I'm shocked; because up to now it has seemed pretty reliable. ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 00:19, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
Brx: in that case it's sensible. To be fair I do support most of the Green agenda (environmental conservation, strong civil liberties, limitation of intellectual property rights, government regulation to strengthen competition, significant efforts to stop global warming, etc.) with the notable exception of energy policy and agricultural policy, where the Green position is absolutely unacceptable to me. My impression is that in Europe these two are basically their only campaign issues. --Tweenk (talk) 15:24, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
Are the Greens pink or red? nobsCorporations are people, too 17:45, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
Economically and socially US Greens belong to "American Progressivism" (Not command economy but a strong state and socially liberal to libertarian) with a slice of environmentalism and pacifism on top. The euro-greens range specific from country to country from centrism (social democracy) to center-left (welfare-statism) and left (democratic socialism), but because for all of those other parties already exist, they focus on environmental issues in their programming. In your world they are radical marxists and babyeaters. --Rutherford (talk) 18:04, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
Translated that means environmentalists are anti-business, anti-capitalist, anti-progress economically. In short, Greens are a Red front group. nobsCorporations are people, too 01:00, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
People's opinion of the Green's are a little bit like a Rorschach inkblot test. I think your description of them sums you up pretty well Rob. DamoHi 02:41, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Well I was lookin' everywhere for them goldarn Reds, got up in the mornin' and looked under my bed... Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 03:38, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

When the Progressive movement started over 100 years ago, the idea of Progress meant economic development. Today Progressivism stands for anything that retards economic development. nobsCorporations are people, too 04:04, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
So, Bush was a progressive? He turned a surplus into a deficit and lost more jobs than he created. Deny this and risk losing credibility whoa, you're ahead of us on that part Sophiebecause liberals 09:30, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
George W. Bush was a big government liberal. nobsCorporations are people, too 19:35, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Oh Robbie dear, that statement will live in infamy... -- 23:42, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

## New Wikipedia milestone

Don't know if anyone noticed, but Wikipedia now has over 4 million articles in English. Even though people all over the world have had eleven years and counting to create articles, that's still an impressive accomplishment. Sam Tally-ho! 03:46, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Even though it was created by a Randroid, Wikipedia is one of the best things about the internet--"Shut up, Brx." 03:49, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
14 to go until we hit 6000 here. We hit 5k last march.Тytalk 03:52, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
even though some of the articles were created by Brx, Rationalwiki is one of the best things about the internet. AceThe Rep Grows Bigger 03:53, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
[citation needed] — Unsigned, by: Doctor Dark / talk / contribs
[1]. AceThe Rep Grows Bigger 04:10, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

<rant> Wikipedia was not created by a randroid. Jimbo merely paid for the servers (or more correctly, they were funded by his soft-core porn site Bomis). Larry Sanger (for all his other faults and failings) was the closest thing to a true creator WP ever had. Jimbo regularly refers to his Jan 2001 email laying out the "five pillars" as proof he "created" WP, but those five pillars came about as the result of discussions with Nupedia contributors, and for the first year of WP Jimbo hardly visited the site. Most editors didn't even know about him. Larry, on the other hand, was involved in every aspect of getting the site off the ground. </rant> VOXHUMANA 04:20, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Who cares, half of Silicon Valley are/were Randriods. AceThe Rep Grows Bigger 04:26, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
I know, I'm more ranting against the whole "Jimbo created Wikipedia" myth. Because most of the 2001 WP data is lost, the only people who can debunk the myth are the handful of editors who were actually there at the time. But there are not enough of us to drown out the "official party line". VOXHUMANA 04:36, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Shall we ask Ed Poor to weigh in? AceThe Rep Grows Bigger 04:38, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Ed didn't even arrive until after Larry left. WP was a year old at that point. VOXHUMANA 04:40, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
I was being a seafish facetious. AceThe Rep Grows Bigger 04:48, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, yes I knew that :). And I'm wrong anyway, it looks like Ed arrived just prior to LMS leaving in Dec 01 - there's an unsigned post on Nostalgia which I suspect is LMS telling Ed off for presenting his opinions as "fact" (scroll down two-thirds of the page, it starts with "Ed, with all due respect...") VOXHUMANA 04:54, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
This stuff is fascinating and please keep sharing recollections about WP's early wild west days. Do you have any tidbits about User:172?. nobsCorporations are people, too 18:16, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
I'm glad to learn this, thank you VH--"Shut up, Brx." 04:49, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
No dramas. FWIW, during my little trip over to Nostalgia to look up Ed Poor I discovered the evidence of my very embarrassing LANCB from WP in Oct 2001. Lame, lame, lame. VOXHUMANA 05:02, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Was it as lame as your LANCB from RW? Heh. AceThe Rep Grows Bigger 05:04, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Worse. My RW LANCB looks quite dignified by comparison. VOXHUMANA 05:11, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Oh dear... AceThe Rep Grows Bigger 05:13, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Wow, LANCBing Wikipedia in October 2001 practically makes you a LANCB pioneer, at least as far as wikis are concerned. I suspect the first LANCB would have taken place on usernet back in the late '80s. - π 06:45, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
LOL... believe it or not, I'm pretty certain I was far from the first Wikipedia LANCB. I don't have the who/when/why details (the data is lost), but even back in Oct 2001 my LANCB was considered a banal event. VOXHUMANA 06:54, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
The first ever LANCB happened of course in 4004 B.C. and is documented in Genesis 3:23. Read your Bible. In regards to Wikipedia, see Genesis 11:4-9 and fear God, because what He did once He could surely do again. Secret Squirrel (talk) 12:35, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Ed, with all due respect, you are apparently using the Wikpedia partially as a forum for the expression of your opinions, and for debate, discussion, and commentary (and also encouraging others to do the same). While a certain amount of this is necessary for the Wikipedia to be built, the main purpose of Wikipedia is to be an encyclopedia. Please make a serious effort to minimize these other activities. Please try to reverse your priorities - don't ask "Is there any change I could possibly make to this entry? / Comment I could possibly make? / Discussion I could possibly encourage?" but rather "Can I possibly restrain myself from changing this? / Expressing my personal views? / Encouraging unhelpful debate?" Please don't put in your 2 cents, 5 cents, or other amount of change unless you are quite sure it will be a valuable and helpful contribution.

I like that. And even Ed Poor's (he wasn't Uncle Ed yet) answer: This is possible the most constructive piece of advice I've received to date and will accordingly be quite a challenge to put into effect.
The earliest (surviving) entry by Ed is from Nov 29, 2001 larronsicut fur in nocte 13:02, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

The flip-side of the 4,000,000 articles is the insufficient number of administrators: 3 charts that show how wikipedia is running out of admins... larronsicut fur in nocte 13:05, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

It's more like the lack of admins who are specialists on a particular topic. Arbitration on WP is such a recipe for it to be balance fallacy city, I'm impressed it's survived this long. Spotting that flaw was where CZ got it right, although managed to completely screw up the implementation. d hominem 10:10, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

## Pamela Gay's TAM speech

So, shall we get up off our asses and do something or just troll the internet? postate 23:01, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
I think you know the answer. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 03:41, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
You want to... block content in my country on copyright grounds?? pathetic 15:09, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Bah, link fail. Fixed now. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 01:22, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Not this, then? pathetic 11:21, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

## Michelle Jenneke

So how many times have you watched the video? I think I'm up around 15... Occasionaluse (talk) 18:07, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Sorry to hear that, man. --2.34.113.53 (talk) 20:21, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
I'm the one who should be apologizing. Occasionaluse (talk) 20:24, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Control your penis. Osaka Sun (talk) 02:48, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
I like the Sabrina Salerno background music. Fitting.--"Shut up, Brx." 15:08, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Any woman that can rock this outfit deserves a gold medal. --K. (talk) 21:35, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

## Cracked delivers again

The 11 Most Unintentionally Hilarious Religious Paintings. --PsyGremlin講話 14:58, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Whut? That second boxing Jesus looks like a beefier version of the Dude from Big Lebowski. WẽãšẽĩõĩďMethinks it is a Weasel 15:25, 21 July 2012 (UTC)