RationalWiki:Saloon bar/Archive346

Bloomberg must be stopped

and Epstein didn't kill himself. — Oxyaena ^Harass 21:25, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Stopped from doing what though? It's very very clear from polling that Bloomberg's net popularity with democrats is quite negative. He's definitely not going to win. So what's he going to do that needs to be stopped? ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 21:31, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

I don't know, it was a bait and switch. — Oxyaena ^Harass 21:37, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Run a third-party campaign and try to siphon enough votes away from Sanders (assuming he's the nominee) to throw the election to Trump. His promises to support the Democratic nominee no matter what are worth as much as you paid to get them. --47.146.63.87 (talk) 23:23, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Also I know it's an epic may-may, but in the absence of evidence to the contrary the likeliest scenario is that Epstein did in fact commit suicide. You know prisoners in the U.S. commit suicide all the time, right? Or do you only care when it's someone rich and well-connected? None of this is incompatible with the idea that powerful people wanted him dead and encouraged corrections officials to look the other way while he was put in a situation where it was easy to commit suicide. --47.146.63.87 (talk) 23:23, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

The coroner said that Epstein may have been killed. Something's fishy about the Epstein case, and there's nothing to be paranoid about here. — Oxyaena ^Harass 01:33, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

And for Epstein, it really was the right thing to do, the best possible outcome for all concerned. Now if only Weinstein's keepers were to look the other way for a few... Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱs. 23:54, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

I'm personally less keen on extrajudicial killings, especially when, if they did happen, they were to cover up other crimes. McUrist (talk) 09:00, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

I agree - er, with the stopping Bloomberg part. Even if you don't like Sanders, picking him over Bernie would not just galvanise the right-wing inside the Dem party, but unambiguously throw the election to Trump if polls are anything to go by. It would confirm that money can win politics. Minish (talk) 23:40, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

I like Bloomberg as much as having a bowel obstruction or a parasitic infection. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 00:19, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

I said it once and I'll say it again: Bloombergs a blessing for Sanders. If second preference votes are any indication Bloomberg is taking very few votes from Sanders. This is the rare occasion the establishments collective corruption fails to consolidate. McUrist (talk) 09:00, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Feb 25, 2020 Dem Debate

Jesus Christ that debate was a shit show. I'm pretty sure high school JSA debates are better moderated.--NavigatorBR(Talk) - 03:41, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

I blame CBS for this mess. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 13:11, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

I wonder why everyone hated Bernie? Hmm.....— Jeh2ow ^{Damn son!} 14:53, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I appreciate how Ice Skates made an ass out of himself and Bloomberg dutifully showed up for his next latest public whipping by Warren. You Won't BELIEVE What Astronomers Found In This Neutron Star! - Number Four WILL Shock You! 20:07, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Thoughts are the enemy

https://www.thesunmagazine.org/issues/131/krishnamurti-remembered

“Thought is time. Thought is born of experience and knowledge which are inseparable from time and the past. Time is the psychological enemy of man. Our action is based on knowledge and therefore time, so man is always a slave to the past. Thought is ever-limited and so we live in constant conflict and struggle. There is no psychological evolution."

I never heard of him before, but he seems only a tiny bit different from the rest of the others I have heard of. I'm not sure about that thoughts and time bit though.Machina (talk) 05:35, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

A mixture of deepities and a couple of bad conclusions. Please watch this video Machina cause I think it is EXTREMELY important that you keep this always at the front of your mind when reading most of the texts you post here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1EuhcxZs1qg

Apart from the deepities the whole thing is a non-sequitur. "There is no psychological evolution" doesn't logically follow from any of the other arguments that were made before. On top of that it is extremely vague (another thing most of these lines suffer from which is partially why some are deepities). It's vague because psychological evolution could mean many things and it isn't clear per the context. But none of that even matters because no possible context would logically follow and in all contexts the conclusion is simply false. We do psychologically evolve as we grow up and we can as adults. ShabiDOO 11:56, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Why does daniel dennet look exactly like James Randi? ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 14:04, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

It is because time and life are both illusions and thus one thing can be the same as another, or not.Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 16:43, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

I don't know about dismissing it as a deepity. That seems short sighted. I mean can we have thoughts without our knowledge or experience of the past? When we are thinking aren't we just recycling things that have already happened and taken place before us? So by thinking wouldn't we be living in the past then? Like he says we are a slave to the past because we are always dredging up things that happened (things that we know).Machina (talk) 22:28, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

No, we cannot have coherent thoughts without knowledge. No when we're thinking we are not in fact just recycling thing that have already happened. Thinking is often a process during which the brain makes new associations between concepts, some of which may be entirely original or at least new to the person themselves. How else do we get inventions? And thus no, by thinking we are not necessarily living in the past, we are mostly living in the present and maybe a bit in the future or the past, unless you are purely reminiscing. We are not slaves to the past any more than we are slaves to the present, in fact, the word slave is not particularly useful here.

Finally, anyone can make sense if you disregard all the stupid stuff they say and only focus on the stuff they said that makes sense to you. They say a lot of utter nonsense that you are just glancing past, like "thought is time", as someone who likes physics who has some idea of how variables like time behave, that is sloppy nonsense to me. "Thought is born of experience and knowledge [bla bla] related to time and past [bla bla] therefore we are slaves to the past". Complete disregard for the influence of the present on our thoughts. Sloppy thinking. Honestly. 82.36.198.177 (talk) 23:20, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Its a deepity because it is something thats totally obvious. Yet its phrased as though its some poetic mystical profound insight. Which is why in one sense it is totally obvious, but on the other hand the broader vaguer idea that "thought is time" is stupid and meaningless. That's a deepity. I mean...if you want to say we are slaves to our past...then just say that. Zheesh. In any case...none of that justifies his conclusion: "There's no psychological evolution". That is just plain false and it doesn't even logically follow from any of his deepities. ShabiDOO 23:23, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

What the fuck is "psychological evolution"? --47.146.63.87 (talk) 00:47, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Ten cream and five sugars

I was watching a documentary in the US (McMillions) and two people order

• One coffee with 10 creamers and 5 sugars
• One coffee with 10 creamers and 5 equal

If a friend of yours ordered that would your reaction be:

• Yeah some people like it that way
• Think to yourself: "Zheesh he should lay off the sugar"
• Say: "Hey man...are you trying to get diabetes"?

Just curious cause they ordered it like it's the most normal thing and after having tried American chocolate and pure icing sugar cream Birthday cakes which I know it can be fairly sweet...so I don't know. ShabiDOO 13:07, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

I don’t know, but could it be that they’re stocking up on creamer/sugar the way some people stock up in condiments at those fast food joints that offer them free of charge? ScepticWombat (talk) 13:38, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

You leave my mother out of this. I've been washing with hotel soap since I was 12. RoundeTheeHorne (talk) 14:48, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

I filled my coat pocket with six handfuls of sauce sachets at 7-Eleven yesterday. Spud (talk)

In my own cooking, I make frequent use of packets of Diablo sauce from Taco Bell in all sorts of things, including quesadillas and omelets. I also get quite a bit of mileage out of tubes of horsey sauce from Arby's. Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱs. 16:24, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

That's my life pro tip: 3 or 4 of them in homemade 珍珠奶茶 for the authentic store-bought texture. McUrist (talk) 16:20, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Not uncommon unfortunately. Sugar is everywhere in the U.S. diet because corn is subsidized to buy votes and benefit Big Agriculture, and sugar producers have successfully lobbied for decades to avert any regulation of sugar and cast blame for obesity and other health issues elsewhere. (Hence high fructose corn syrup, but that's just sugar syrup so it falls under "sugar".) As you have demonstrated, many people from other countries remark on how U.S. food products taste abnormally sweet to them. The insidious thing is most sugar is in things people don't mentally class as sweets/candy/etc. so they don't think they're consuming a lot of sugar. (The nutrition label will tell you but no one reads that.) You see lines out the door at Starbucks, but most people aren't ordering straight coffee; they're basically getting milkshakes with some coffee added, and doing this every day, and they don't think it's unhealthy because it's "coffee". Then some people get habituated and expect everything to taste sweet so they add more to stuff that doesn't have it added already. No wonder almost half the adult population has diabetes or prediabetes. --47.146.63.87 (talk) 00:02, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Yeah I was conscious of the proliferation of high fructose corn syrup in our foods and used to buy in to the whole "organic cane sugar is better for you", but I think I just realized that your body metabolizes both as sugar, so organic cane sugar's just some marketing gimmick. I don't think HFCS in of itself is any more dangerous than sugar, but that it's so cheap to put in foods, that's why you find it in bread, tomato sauce, barbecue sauce, beans in sauce, etc. On a tangent, it's surprising that the whole pineapples on pizza debacle is even a thing since that food's already getting drugged with sugar (tomato sauce's sweet enough...), and marinating meat in soda is actually a good way to flavor the meat. Huh does anyone just order coffee black like I do? Along with drinking beer and tolerating 80% dark chocolate, seems like I have a better tolerance for bitter foods. On the other hand, I really can't stand the taste of just water especially without ice. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 00:49, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Hey @LeftyGreenMario, I like my coffee as black and unsweetened as they come, so no, you’re not alone (and yes, dark chocolate ftw; I’ve never liked milk chocolate). Can’t remember if you’re from the States, but it seems that our friends and allies across the pond generally prefer (or at least get) their various foods, beverages and what have you, somewhat sweeter than tends to be the case in (some? most?) European countries. At least, one complaint/anecdote I often hear from people who’ve been to the US, is how much more sweetened things seem to be. And no, I don’t like pineapple on my pizza, despite this being pretty much a standard variant at most pizzerias (excuse me, “pizzarias”, as they tend to be spelled here, sigh) in my neck of the woods. As for alcohol: No beer, no wine, just (real) cider and booze... ScepticWombat (talk) 04:51, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Goody. I'm from the States. I used to drink my coffee with just one spoon of sugar and milk but I remember milk coming with digestion problems and besides, I don't mind acquiring some tastes. I like milk chocolate and dark chocolate, though dark ones can get pretty intense. White is my favorite though, but I have a tendency to prefer the cream/vanilla over the dark stuff when it comes to sweets. Well, I know corn subsidies in the U.S. is responsible for everything tasting sweeter, as HFCS is a cheap sweetener that can make foods taste better, hence being added to everything. I don't recall being in shock about how plain foods taste in France over 10 years ago, though. I also know another frequent complaint about U.S. food is the portion sizes. I also find portion sizes to be complete overkill in most American sit-downs. The appetizer is pretty much one full meal... --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 07:22, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

French cuisine atypically uses rich (butter, cream, etc.) sauces and spices, so it's definitely not plain. (The most "plain cuisine" I remember having was in north China surprisingly, though since this was on a tour a long time ago I'm not sure how typical it was, and whether things have changed.) I actually find it annoying how much sugar is added to foods in the US. And the same for portion size -- French food may be rich but they typically don't serve it in 2000 calorie portions like certain American restaurant chains do. Soundwave106 (talk) 13:24, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

I certainly wouldn't call French food plain. The Netherlands on the other hand. Have a tradition of eating unseasoned (even unsalted) meat with potatoes. Can be the same in Ireland and in parts of Scandinavia. Portions are already large in Canada but zheesh in a chain restaurant in the US. I mean...when I got a litre bowl filled with Spaghetti (and I'm a big guy) I couldn't possibly finish it without getting sick. The sweet American milk chocolate...I could only have a little bit at a time. And its really such a shame cause there really are some fantastic American desserts (like cinnamon rolls or apple pie) but I would have enjoyed them so much more with a fraction of the sugar. Still...it utterly baffles me that anyone would want to add FIVE SUGARS to their coffee. Christ all mighty. You know that cliché phrase "would you like some coffee with your sugar"? I think this would be an inironic version. ShabiDOO 17:21, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Well, I would say that seeing some elderly Mediterranean men sweetening their espressos does have the appearance of a “How much sugar can I possibly dissolve in this tiny cup?” contest. So it’s not like it’s only Yanks who like inordinate amounts of sugar for a given measure of coffee. But then, older people tends to have more of a sweet tooth in general, no matter where you are (apparently, it has to do with how tastebuds changes with age). ScepticWombat (talk) 18:18, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

I know French cuisine can be rich in dairy, but I was thinking about if they add sugar to everything like Americans do. Portion sizes in French cuisine are a lot smaller too and reasonable; dishes feel like the right size. In U.S. American sit-down restaurants, I really don't trust the sizes on the menu and I'm expect to split my entree with my sister to finish the food in the first place. Dessert and appetizers? Get out of here. Huh, as for the Netherlands, it's not like they're really known for their cuisine unlike France, Spain, Italy, India, and China, so I'm not too surprised that something like unseasoned meat with potatoes being a staple (bleh). American milk chocolate, by the way, can hurt my teeth sometimes, which makes me worry if I have a cavity, and it's the reason I don't enjoy chocolate as much as other people and much prefer like, synthetic sweets like gummies and lollipops.

I know older people have changing tastes, but don't think my dad has a sweet tooth (my mom does though). Anyhow, I know older people tend to not tolerate spicy food as much, so I'm here trying to enjoy spicy food to the fullest (and to think I used to be the type that dies to Hot Cheetos). --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 21:39, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Typical commie furriner. Sounds like you have a problem with the taste of FREEDOM!!11!11 *crying bald eagle superimposed over a waving American flag* --47.146.63.87 (talk) 05:57, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Pfffft. Bald eagles don't even "cry", they make these adorable cheeping and chuckling noises!

--It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 08:03, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Yes, sucrose ("cane sugar") is equally bad-for-you as glucose-fructose syrup (HFCS), since all that happens is the sucrose is split apart in your gut into glucose and fructose. Di/polysaccharides can't cross the gut wall into your blood. As the high fructose corn syrup article amply demonstrates, anyone thinking one industrially-refined product is "unnatural" and another is not is believing in nonsense, but of course lots of people believe in nonsense and marketers are eager to take advantage of that. Me: coffee, black, chocolate, black. What's the point of altering a thing you don't like so you can consume the thing you don't like? Okay, that's a rhetorical question; I know people are after the caffeine. Caffeine tablets are way cheaper but then you're not following the herd. Why would I take pills like some druggie? Now, where's my whisky and smokes?! --47.146.63.87 (talk) 05:57, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

I dunno about altering thing you don't like so you can eat, I mean, if you cook or season something, you're guilty of altering food. Hell, most things you eat have already been altered from the "natural" form thousands of years ago. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 08:03, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Right, I'm thinking mainly of people who protest that they can't stand coffee unless they dump loads of sweetener into it. What's the point to drinking it then? Spices and stuff usually enhance flavor more than totally cover up some other taste. --47.146.63.87 (talk) 08:32, 28 February 2020 (UTC)