RationalWiki:Saloon bar/Archive386
Andrew Yang for Mayor?[edit]
Since Yang is (for now at least) the frontrunner in the NYC mayoral election...what are your thoughts on him? Would he make a good mayor?
He has an interesting mix of ideas. I just wondered what the community thinks.-Flandres (talk) 15:42, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, I‘d support him. Kevs Ping! 16:58, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- While I wouldn't usually vote for a Democrat (nor am I old enough yet), I would vote for Yang if I was a New Yorker. His tenure couldn't be nearly anything worse than Cuomo. Roman Sionis tends to be inactive during summer 18:35, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you for your vote, valued citizen. Now hand over your apartment so it can be replaced with a tech office! Princess Mononokeradio contact 18:57, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- Hey! Yang is willing to spend good money to watch you live in that tech office! He likes to watch. But seriously, hand over your apartment as a threat? Somebody hasn't rented. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 04:39, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
Japanese Wikipedia[edit]
Apparently, its full of misinformation and biases towards the nationalist sect of Japan. This reminds me a lot about how the Croatian version of TOW was filled with right-wing propaganda. Thoughts?— Jeh2ow Damn son! 14:22, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
- It sucks plain and simple. I noticed that Wikipedia (Including the English branch) would always have some sort of misinformation or misinterpreted information to promote a political belief and that would generally take a few years for it to finally go away. I like RationalWiki because, unlike Wikipedia, it does not have this kind of junk and whenever it does, it (generally) gets reverted quickly, unless the "vocal minority" has a problem with that reversion. 2A02:120B:C3FB:3B40:41C7:DE73:EC5D:B3C7 (talk) 14:38, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
- Except the wiki does have this kind of junk, it's just open about it. — Oxyaena Harass 15:26, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
- Yeah, thanks to the likes of you. 2A02:120B:C3FB:3B40:41C7:DE73:EC5D:B3C7 (talk) 16:06, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
- Except the wiki does have this kind of junk, it's just open about it. — Oxyaena Harass 15:26, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
|
|---|
|
- When do we impose an interaction ban to you? You clearly have an unhealthy grudge against the Leftists here. MarioSuperstar77 (talk) 17:25, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
- Don't feed the troll...-Flandres (talk) 17:25, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Flandres @Jeh2ow A troll is someone who purposely say controversial stuff (Baiting) to start flamewars or is overall annoying on purpose. Neither of those definitions would fit the anon here who just seems to hate me in particular. Coombs is a troll because he vandalizes the wiki on purpose (What kind of vandalism isn't on purpose though?) meanwhile this person was here before, they only recently started getting handed blocks because they can't be bothered to look away since they seem to have a real issue with me, GC and Oxy being here. Honestly, I am going on and on on a tangent, but you should stop substituting "troll" for "harasser" because the definition for "harasser" definitely fits that case. In fact, that is why I suggested the interaction ban. MarioSuperstar77 (talk) 17:31, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
- I'm not involved in this discussion. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 17:34, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
- That range posted expletives about you on your own talk page and they likely indirectly mentioned you by saying "vocal minority". I think they are talking about Leftists on-site and for whatever reason, it bugs them. MarioSuperstar77 (talk) 17:36, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
- You are giving this matter way too much attention/thought. Please calm down.-Flandres (talk) 17:38, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
- We didn't start the flamewar, it was always burning since the wiki's been turning, but when we are gone the flames will burn on and on and on and on *doo doo dee doo doo* SockPup (talk) 17:48, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
- This happens every time, when Helena Bonham Carter harasses Oxyaena, this is downplayed as "Ahah trolling". This is why I wish I was allowed to ban her on the spot or at least start a successful chicken coop on her, but seeing how that went last time, I remain pessimistic if I were to start another one. MarioSuperstar77 (talk) 17:51, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
- Something tells me I (cory) will act as a spoiler and split Ace's votes in november. Ah well, good thing we have the weird system we do instead of FPTP. Was an alt-mod way back when. SockPup (talk) 18:13, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
- Guys, please, let's get back on track. I'd rather hear moar about the Japanese Wikipedia than some dick-measuring dispute. Roman Sionis tends to be inactive during summer 00:37, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- This happens every time, when Helena Bonham Carter harasses Oxyaena, this is downplayed as "Ahah trolling". This is why I wish I was allowed to ban her on the spot or at least start a successful chicken coop on her, but seeing how that went last time, I remain pessimistic if I were to start another one. MarioSuperstar77 (talk) 17:51, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
- We didn't start the flamewar, it was always burning since the wiki's been turning, but when we are gone the flames will burn on and on and on and on *doo doo dee doo doo* SockPup (talk) 17:48, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
- You are giving this matter way too much attention/thought. Please calm down.-Flandres (talk) 17:38, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
- That range posted expletives about you on your own talk page and they likely indirectly mentioned you by saying "vocal minority". I think they are talking about Leftists on-site and for whatever reason, it bugs them. MarioSuperstar77 (talk) 17:36, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
- I'm not involved in this discussion. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 17:34, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Flandres @Jeh2ow A troll is someone who purposely say controversial stuff (Baiting) to start flamewars or is overall annoying on purpose. Neither of those definitions would fit the anon here who just seems to hate me in particular. Coombs is a troll because he vandalizes the wiki on purpose (What kind of vandalism isn't on purpose though?) meanwhile this person was here before, they only recently started getting handed blocks because they can't be bothered to look away since they seem to have a real issue with me, GC and Oxy being here. Honestly, I am going on and on on a tangent, but you should stop substituting "troll" for "harasser" because the definition for "harasser" definitely fits that case. In fact, that is why I suggested the interaction ban. MarioSuperstar77 (talk) 17:31, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
- Don't feed the troll...-Flandres (talk) 17:25, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
- When do we impose an interaction ban to you? You clearly have an unhealthy grudge against the Leftists here. MarioSuperstar77 (talk) 17:25, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
- Is there any info on how long it's been this way? 24.228.242.185 (talk) 07:20, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
- Sorry, I've gt nothing Roman Sionis tends to be inactive during summer 23:26, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
I got a nice big project ahead of me[edit]
I am working on a collaboration video with a person from Australia. Said person is an EAS YouTuber like me. What will make it more difficult is that the video will be based on a book and the fact that we live on literally opposite ends of the world. --Eggs Over EASyPlus (talk) 23:44, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- That's fucking cool, and the right way to go. Glad y'all are making an EAS earth sandwich. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 04:12, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
Found this bizarre news site that i think needs a few looks taken.[edit]
So yeah, while browsing around for the Evergiven fiasco, i found an ""article"" from an alleged news site calling itself "romancatholicimperialist.com", that only consisted of a few lines of severely racist dribble.
Other pages include Robin William's death being due to autoerotic asphyxiation and not suicide (Why do people continually do this..?) And.. Whatever the hell you call this. https://www.romancatholicimperialist.com/2021/03/barnhardtite-rad-trad-burns-down-three.html — Unsigned, by: Xnopyt / talk / contribs
- Looks like this is just one guy’s blog. Christopher (talk) 12:21, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
- Yep, Blogger.com. Claims to be from Uganda. I'd buy that this is not an American style religious nut at least. Seems to have an obsession with Our Lady of La Salette
and the apocalyptic, conspiratorial shit of Mélanie Calvat's later "vision" descriptions in particular (that were influenced by stuff she read on the Illuminati, apparently). Not the most common obsession that I know of. PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 13:13, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
- I am losing my interest in seeing what cranks, conspiracy theorists and other nutters are doing. They are engaging in unproductive activities that are dead ends. People involved in improving things are much more interesting.
- Serious endeavors and crankery are like walking canes. A good cane is largely straight. But a crooked cane can go crooked in a myriad of ways. The possibilities of the different ways people can be cranks is endless.Rathmelders (talk) 14:32, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
- Interesting that you created an account here just for this post. At any rate, while a crank on a blog spouting Catholic heresy only wastes a few electrons here and there, other cranks unfortunately actively engage in opposition to improvement (one only has to look to the crankery surrounding the COVID-19 vaccine to see that). While later Mélanie Calvat's apocalyptic visions are not part of the church, limited mysticism including Marian apparitions (such as the initial "vision" description of Our Lady of La Salette, which is approved) are a significant part of Catholicism, which is both large and influential, and has not always played nice with rationality and progress. PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 17:05, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
- Yep, Blogger.com. Claims to be from Uganda. I'd buy that this is not an American style religious nut at least. Seems to have an obsession with Our Lady of La Salette
Minecraft added goats[edit]
Take it as you will.
Source: https://www.minecraft.net/fr-fr/article/minecraft-snapshot-21w13a
MarioSuperstar77 (talk) 21:25, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- Hail to the Holy Goat. --Eggs Over EASyPlus (talk) 00:08, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
- When will they add the Warden? Roman Sionis tends to be inactive during summer 02:07, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
- ITS SPELED MINDCRAFT Jenius
Here's a fictional article (not a full article yet) I made, including my made-up word, "fæty." I also call cats cows because the cow in the image makes meows that kind of sound like the word "cow".
FætyCow[edit]
12:15, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
My greatest work yet[edit]
It is based off Local 58 and it takes place in modern day Australia (which does not exist sheeple). --Eggs Over EASyPlus (talk) 23:22, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
- Australia, along with the entire Southern Hemisphere, doesn't exist and is merely a creation of Big Globe to suppress flat earth. Wake up sheeple! Marquee Moon (talk) 01:05, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
- I love it. The opening is really careful and you know I appreciate that. Then it's bleak juxtaposition about the difference between victory and death, and you should know I appreciate that. Give it the chef's kiss but keep going and explore other juxtapositions, work hard on the language. Very interesting "all is lost but we can win in death" stuff, rattles me personally a bit, but again, awesome disclaimers, I really appreciate that aspect of a video that involves violence and self-harm, it's fucking responsible. I'm happy to see you creating at higher levels, keep doing it. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 04:28, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
- Figured that the different disclaimer was a good idea considering the content. My regular disclaimer was not good enough knowing underage kids watch when they are not supposed to.
- I love it. The opening is really careful and you know I appreciate that. Then it's bleak juxtaposition about the difference between victory and death, and you should know I appreciate that. Give it the chef's kiss but keep going and explore other juxtapositions, work hard on the language. Very interesting "all is lost but we can win in death" stuff, rattles me personally a bit, but again, awesome disclaimers, I really appreciate that aspect of a video that involves violence and self-harm, it's fucking responsible. I'm happy to see you creating at higher levels, keep doing it. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 04:28, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
In terms of quality I am getting my stimulus money so I can get a new video editing program. --Eggs Over EASyPlus (talk) 14:21, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
Americans are obsessed with fitness because of "Neoliberalism" according to a Saloon interview[edit]
Just a few days after that whole discussion about HAES. Unsurprisingly, the guy claiming it is not a physician or a nutritionist, but a historian. Even more unsurprisingly and embarrassing is his golden hammer at the end of the interview. GeeJayK (talk) 18:11, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- That in no way explains how this article is problematic and/or "embarrassing," all you've offered is a bunch of assertions. — Oxyaena Harass 18:48, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- FThe author doesn't offer us any form of evidence. Are Americans really obsessed with fitness? If they are how can you correlate it with "neoliberalism"? He doesn't mention a single statistic, regression or another author. He wrote a book (or at least gave an interview) based on his own perception only. Supposing he's right, he doesn't explain why it's a bad thing. He doesn't explain what's he calling "neoliberalism", just use it as a snarl word and mistakes it with rugged individualism. I doubt he knows considering the last paragraph of the text. GeeJayK (talk) 19:05, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- The Ancient Greek were pretty obsessed with body ideas and fitness too. Arguably the world's first modern Western bodybuilder/strongman was Eugen Sandow (1890s-1920s). Friedrich Ludwig Jahn (the father of modern gymnastics) started the first turnplatz in 1811. Exercise culture in some form or another has been around for a while, much longer than neo-liberalism. Not all modern events are high cost or ultra-competitive (see 5K run events). There is a correlation between income and how much people exercise and there's a slight "beauty premium" in the marketplace (not as much as one would think though) but I'm not sure this even can strongly correlate to "neo-liberalism". It's kind of a strange assertion to me as well. PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 00:59, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
- Neoliberalism poisoned our water supply, burned our crops and delivered a plague unto our houses! Marquee Moon (talk) 01:43, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
- The Ancient Greek were pretty obsessed with body ideas and fitness too.
- FThe author doesn't offer us any form of evidence. Are Americans really obsessed with fitness? If they are how can you correlate it with "neoliberalism"? He doesn't mention a single statistic, regression or another author. He wrote a book (or at least gave an interview) based on his own perception only. Supposing he's right, he doesn't explain why it's a bad thing. He doesn't explain what's he calling "neoliberalism", just use it as a snarl word and mistakes it with rugged individualism. I doubt he knows considering the last paragraph of the text. GeeJayK (talk) 19:05, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- I think Americans are obsessed with fitness because a bunch of us are fatasses. I speak as a semi-fatass myself.
Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 01:50, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
i think the general gist is how fitness culture over the years has changed according to the needs of society. the article gives the example of the new deal era as comparison where fitness ideals were about being fit and healthy enough to handle arduous labour in work programes - fitness for the greater good sold with images of solidarity. thats kind of what 'fit' used to mean - it meant you were fit to serve.
fitness as whole we see it today is a product of post industrial society. previous to this it was the reserve of nobility, particularly nobility forming a warrior class. the peasants breaking their backs in the fields didnt need to go for a jog to keep the weight off. the victorians however were much disappointed to general fitness of the enlisted men.
its true that sandow and others pioneered modern fitness but this was by no means the obssession it is today. thats when science started to be applied to health and fitness, but it took a while for that become mainstream. the 70s is suggested in the article for the current fitness culture to really take hold and explode. tha sounds about right to me. thats about the time the fitness industry really started to boom and become the beast it is today. the likes of charles atlas and steve reeves laid the ground work, but the 70s was the pumping iron era that brought the world swarzenegger.
and now we have youtube fitness and instagram selling programes and supplements and a lifestyle. the argument made is that currently the fitness industry is not selling fitness but body image. body building is about being strong or fast, its about the aesthetic. cars and houses and conspicuous wealth arent enough to show ones worth and success. you need the body too for the complete package, for your branding, to tell the world of your dedication and mastery of every part of your life. this is fitness not to serve as in previous eras but for self promotion. obesity conversely is an affront to the all of this. anything less that perfection indicates you are not maximising your time, not making the full effort in all parts of your life, shows weakness, sloth, it shows failure.
the article i might add, is a just a interview to sell a book. stats and methodology and any actual detail should be found within the book expect. criticism should probably be based on that and not the promo. AMassiveGay (talk) 02:16, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
- I don't disagree with you, but if you're trying to make a point you should at least give us a couple of evidences instead of just a bunch of ramblings, don't you think so? I've seen other interviews where the author is also trying to sell his book, but they also try to go at least a little bit deeper. GeeJayK (talk) 02:21, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
- I think the argument becomes stronger if: A) you don't use an economic concept like "neo-liberalism" and stick with a more generic terms for hyper-competitive, ego-centric and egotistical cultures ("Randian" perhaps?); B) you restrict the fitness scenes to those that are more ego oriented or cultish, which isn't the entire fitness scene. Bodybuilding certainly counts as too often ego/cultish, as does certain scenes like Crossfit and a lot of the Youtube / Instagram fitness scene. Any other pricey trend du jours targeting the type A executive class also count. Some things only count as partial credit, though, if you strip away the trappings. (Take away the production and supplements and that P90X mail order fitness video beloved by Paul Ryan types is just circuit training, a concept developed in 1953). PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 12:48, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
- Before my time, but I know Jim Fixx was big on popularizing running as exercise too. That touched off something of a craze. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 16:28, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
- I think the argument becomes stronger if: A) you don't use an economic concept like "neo-liberalism" and stick with a more generic terms for hyper-competitive, ego-centric and egotistical cultures ("Randian" perhaps?); B) you restrict the fitness scenes to those that are more ego oriented or cultish, which isn't the entire fitness scene. Bodybuilding certainly counts as too often ego/cultish, as does certain scenes like Crossfit
- I don't disagree with you, but if you're trying to make a point you should at least give us a couple of evidences instead of just a bunch of ramblings, don't you think so? I've seen other interviews where the author is also trying to sell his book, but they also try to go at least a little bit deeper. GeeJayK (talk) 02:21, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
- I think there's a kernel of truth in there. One of the most toxic things about US culture is the pervasive belief that the degenerative diseases of old age are All Your Fault for Not Living Right. If you'd spent extra for organic, did more jogging, or ate more kale and fewer Big Macs you wouldn't have caught heart disease or cancer, or so the story goes. But the right regimen will confer prolonged youth. And like everything else, it costs money. Diet and exercise are worthwhile proxies for your willingness to suffer for conformity. They are one of the latest vessels into which the old problem, the puritan mind, has poured itself; health is today what money used to be, an outward sign that you are one of God's elect. The whole 'personal responsibility' mummery is allied with meritocratic thinking, and as such at least broadly consistent with 'neo-liberalism' in its fuzziest definitions. Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱsos. 20:34, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
Conspiracy theorist who hates Walmart films himself...... going to fucking Walmart.[edit]
Oh my GOD..... what is it with these people. Literally EVERYONE who says they hate going to Walmart literally goes to fucking Walmart. "ThE oThEr StOrE iS tOo FaR" "ThEy ArE tHe OnLy OnEs ThAt CaRrY mY fAvOrItE bRaNd Of BrOwN sUgAr". It's like my GOD you people. Quit complaining about Walmart if you literally go there. PS sorry for back to back posts.Aaronmichael503:50, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
- You can dislike a thing and still rely on it. I'm also not into "complain culture" and this guy is clearly the worst of it, but like, is it OK to have problems with Wal-Mart if it's the only the only place you can afford to shop at within 20 miles? Like, isn't there a shitload of context that would be needed that you can't just ship in and let rot at a potential loss? Gol Sarnitt (talk) 05:16, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
- When your fake girlfriend needs cilantro you must suck it up and go. Antigem (talk) 20:48, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
- I was in Wal-Mart yesterday and I saw a dude wearing a mask (improperly) that had the logo of Info Wars. Speaking on right wing nuts, there is a growing movement in my area against the construction of solar farms. These are the same people who cry about "toxins" in vaccines yet happily ignoring companies dumping toxic crap into water supplies and toxic clouds in the air. --Eggs Over EASyPlus (talk) 19:23, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- Hypocrisy is part of human nature. Imagine people sitting around drinking gin and tonics and smoking cigarettes while telling each other how bad recreational drugs are.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 12:04, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
- I was in Wal-Mart yesterday and I saw a dude wearing a mask (improperly) that had the logo of Info Wars. Speaking on right wing nuts, there is a growing movement in my area against the construction of solar farms. These are the same people who cry about "toxins" in vaccines yet happily ignoring companies dumping toxic crap into water supplies and toxic clouds in the air. --Eggs Over EASyPlus (talk) 19:23, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- When your fake girlfriend needs cilantro you must suck it up and go. Antigem (talk) 20:48, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
Something of interest[edit]
I wonder how much this will affect Israeli society and by extension, Palestinian society? Even more intriguing is that a few seats in the Israeli legislature were won by an Islamic party. --Eggs Over EASyPlus (talk) 17:22, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
- Ironically, the biggest way to combat extremist ideology is to listen to extremists, let them know you "hear" them and that they aren't being ignored. From there, they become much more willing to talk, and while it takes time, eventually they can "grow out of it". One of the more amazing TED talks was from a Black Jazz musician who became friends with leaders of the Klan and eventually numerous Klansmen left, to the point where he has something like thirty Klan robes in his closet. So even if the Islamist party is "bad" (they are often accused of being Islamist rather than just Islamic), having them in there isn't necessarily a bad thing. CorSock (talk) 17:35, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
- Exactly, and it's not like they'll even have anything close to control over any one thing with such a small presence. All in all, none of it really makes any massive difference so they might as well have seats in the legislature. Princess Mononokeradio contact 18:55, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
Kenneth Copeland banishes COVID, but it's heavy metal[edit]
Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 21:02, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
- Pure divine inspiration. Always a pleasure to see what new wild scheme Duce concocts. Cheers, and amen, brother! Roman Sionis tends to be inactive during summer 00:40, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- Lol, glad you liked it! Although, just to be clear, I didn’t make this. I just thought it was too good not to share. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 01:05, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- Lol, glad you liked it! Although, just to be clear, I didn’t make this. I just thought it was too good not to share.
- Ha ha, I guessed as much, but I don't care, as long as it's funny. You made my evening; allow me to return the favor.
Roman Sionis tends to be inactive during summer 12:39, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- Copeland should bring a big silver cross on airlplanes to keep the demon infested people away from him in public airliner airplanes. Hey, crosses keep vampires away. You never know. Maybe a big wooden stake and hammer might help too as that works on vampires I am told. The stewardesses might complain a little bit when Copeland drives his wooden stake through the hearts of his fellow passengers, but sometimes a man's gotta do what a man's gotta do. And he could eat lots of garlic before getting on planes too as that keeps vampires away. And it would keep the demon infested passengers away from him as well. I don't care how much expensive cologne Copeland wears, it's not going to counteract eating 30 cloves of garlic.S'chn T'gai Spock (talk) 10:04, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
Something fairly accurate[edit]
Climate change deniers say God will fix the issues yet their own fucking bible says that people are supposed to care for the Earth. Stupid people are so annoying. --Eggs Over EASyPlus (talk) 20:30, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
- I wonder what religion will look like long after climate change has reached its peak. They'll all have to grapple with the inherently and unfairly hostile nature of reality at that point. They'll probably say it's the anticipation of Judgement Day or some shit. Nebuchadnezzar7658 (talk) 17:06, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- Won't that, if anything, be seen as vindication? Time to purge the wicked and such.-Flandres (talk) 17:58, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- I guess not. God seems to fetishize destroying the planet and everyone in it. So they probably are doing God's work in a way.— Jeh2ow Damn son! 18:01, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- "Being a Good Christian is all about controlling your 'depraved' urges such as homosexuality because it'll harm others, somehow, but it has nothing to do with me controlling my urge to drive an SUV!" CorruptUser 18:14, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Flandres Possibly, but what happens when nature reveals itself to be dispassionate and amoral? When religious nuts realize that they and things they treasure are just as subordinate to the elements as everyone else, what claim will they have to metaphysical privilege? Or, what happens if cherished locations like Israel or Arabia become inhospitable? Sure, the reactions of the hyper-religious to climate change will be diverse, but I can't see it working in their favour. Nebuchadnezzar7658 (talk) 18:18, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- Religion has a magical power to rationalize almost any traumatic circumstance, especially an apocalyptic one. Even if the old ones are invalidated, new ones may arrive to fill that void.-Flandres (talk) 18:28, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Flandres So do you think a post-climate change world will be more or less religious than the one we live in now? (Not regarding all the other ecological crises that will fuck us up over the next few centuries) Nebuchadnezzar7658 (talk) 18:45, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- That depends on how access to education is affected.-Flandres (talk) 18:51, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- Disaster always leads to more religion. The greatest threats to religion are a robust welfare system, high social mobility, and a functioning healthcare system. CorruptUser 18:53, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- @CorruptUser So we're fucked? Nebuchadnezzar7658 (talk) 18:58, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- Disaster always leads to more religion. The greatest threats to religion are a robust welfare system, high social mobility, and a functioning healthcare system. CorruptUser 18:53, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- That depends on how access to education is affected.-Flandres (talk) 18:51, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Flandres So do you think a post-climate change world will be more or less religious than the one we live in now? (Not regarding all the other ecological crises that will fuck us up over the next few centuries) Nebuchadnezzar7658 (talk) 18:45, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- Religion has a magical power to rationalize almost any traumatic circumstance, especially an apocalyptic one. Even if the old ones are invalidated, new ones may arrive to fill that void.-Flandres (talk) 18:28, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- Didn't god tell us to treat Earth properly and avoid meat whenever possible? In both the Bible and Quran Pork is banned. 2A02:120B:C3FB:3B40:405E:9B00:E152:34FE (talk) 18:57, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- Taking care of the Earth? Yes, there are more than a few verses that can (and probably should) be interpreted that way. Avoid meat? Nope. There's a list of animals you aren't supposed to eat, and a list of those that you are. Besides, how likely is a group of semi-nomadic herders going to decide to go vegetarians?
- Honestly, nowhere in the Quran, Torah, or even the New Testament is there anything about not eating meat. Various sects have strictures about that, but their canonical sources tend to be a stretch, or "extra" scripture from the newest prophet on the block. Kencolt (talk) 11:25, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
- Rather, the Bible says that in the beginning even lions were vegetarian. OTOH, it contains detailed instructions for a shedload of animal sacrifices, some of which you get to eat when done. Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱsos. 16:11, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
- When the reality of climate change becomes impossible to ignore, it will still be possible to blame it on scapegoats. Rather than accept any responsibility, it's much easier say that it is God punishing us for allowing sinners to prosper, when we should have enforced an evangelical theocracy. Serene (talk) 19:32, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- Quoting the character Hank Hill from Mike Judge's King of the Hill,
- @Flandres Possibly, but what happens when nature reveals itself to be dispassionate and amoral? When religious nuts realize that they and things they treasure are just as subordinate to the elements as everyone else, what claim will they have to metaphysical privilege? Or, what happens if cherished locations like Israel or Arabia become inhospitable? Sure, the reactions of the hyper-religious to climate change will be diverse, but I can't see it working in their favour. Nebuchadnezzar7658 (talk) 18:18, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- "Being a Good Christian is all about controlling your 'depraved' urges such as homosexuality because it'll harm others, somehow, but it has nothing to do with me controlling my urge to drive an SUV!" CorruptUser 18:14, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- I guess not. God seems to fetishize destroying the planet and everyone in it. So they probably are doing God's work in a way.— Jeh2ow Damn son! 18:01, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- Won't that, if anything, be seen as vindication? Time to purge the wicked and such.-Flandres (talk) 17:58, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
“”That's ridiculous, you can't just cause a problem and then ask someone else to fix it
|
Yes the quote pertains to polluting the environment when the character Dale Gribble mentions carbon offsets as a way to pretend that you care about the environment. This happens after the character Buck Strickland dumps empty propane tanks into a river to avoid proper disposal. --Eggs Over EASyPlus (talk) 19:37, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- Hot take: Evangelicals are idiots, they should care about the environment instead of pretending it is an ILLUM1NATI HOAX. MarioSuperstar77 (talk) 19:43, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
You can spin it depending on the version of Christianity. You can go with Genesis 1:26 where man has dominion over the earth (which some argue means "man" can do what he likes to it), with various biblical verses which say take care of the Earth, or you can go with the more apocalyptic versions of Christianity associated with Millennialism which have the world ending any day now so it doesn't really matter if we take care of it or not. It's always multiple choice.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 08:06, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
Health tip[edit]
I have been feeling quite run down for more than a few weeks, months actually, and I thought that maybe a walk, first thing in the morning might cheer me up. What a difference it made! When I got out of bed after a solid 9 hours, I quickly dressed and walked abound the neighborhood for 15 minutes, even before coffee. It was a sort of autonomic reset that lasted most of the day. You might try it if you were feeling low.UncleKrampus (talk) 22:37, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
Bongolian (talk) 06:46, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
- I watched a rags to riches interview of an executive. He advocated cold showers in the morning.
- I did a bit of online research and found....
- "Depression affects at least 10 percent, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Many drugs treat depression, depending on the severity or duration of symptoms... Taking a cold shower for up to 5 minutes, 2 to 3 times per week, was shown to help relieve symptoms of depression in a clinical trial.
- For people with depression, cold showers can work as a kind of gentle electroshock therapy. The cold water sends many electrical impulses to your brain. They jolt your system to increase alertness, clarity, and energy levels. Endorphins, which are sometimes called happiness hormones, are also released. This effect leads to feelings of well-being and optimism."[1]
- There is no way that I am going to take a 5 minute cold shower (at least not at first), but maybe a minute or two would be ok.
- Many successful people advocate reading or listening to uplifting material in the golden hour (first hour after sunrise) too.S'chn T'gai Spock (talk) 07:02, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
Fun fact[edit]
| DFTT |
|---|
|
Did you know that spiders cannot physically die of natural causes? If kept safe, a spider can continue to live and. grow larger for a theoretically unlimited amount of time. In fact, in China there exists a collection of 'holy' spiders, hatched some 2,800 years ago during the height of the Mang-Tsun dynasty.— Unsigned, by: Mittens / talk / contribs 15:47, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
|
QAnon: Trailer Park Scientology[edit]
It makes so much freaking sense! Q Anon is scientology for rednecks. Tell me I am wrong. --Eggs Over EASyPlus (talk) 21:05, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- You're wrong. It's very easy to dismiss Qanoners as uninformed hicks, rather than what they really are, Ur-Fascism. It's also inaccurate, since Qanon is a cross-demographic cult/conspiracy theory, which includes rich and poor, urban and rural, black and white, men and women, etc. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 21:19, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- In a sense, Qanon reminds me of a religion, or what will fulfill the psychological impulses that lead to religion as the notion of theism itself becomes less tenable-Flandres (talk) 01:37, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
- It provides an easy way for the conservative evangelical church to poison the well. By associated liberalism, and thus atheism, with Satanism, it ought to decrease the likelihood of deconversion and credulous folks coming to their senses.𝔖𝔲𝔪𝔪𝔞 𝔄𝔱𝔥𝔢𝔬𝔩𝔬𝔤𝔦𝔠𝔞 (𝔮𝔲𝔢𝔯𝔢𝔩𝔦𝔰) (𝔰𝔠𝔯𝔦𝔭𝔱𝔲𝔯𝔞) 01:49, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
- There is a problem, in that old Correlation_does_not_imply_causation problem. It's not that the government doesn't lie, it's not that people don't lie. But interpreting the information is our jobs, as individuals. Recognizing personal bias is kind of a big step. I had a guy tell me, in terms of the Chauvin case, that dealing with somebody who is speedballing is scary and unpredictable, and he doesn't think that Chauvin did his job right, which I totally hand the ball over to this guy when he wants to talk about dealing with that. Then he says, but people just want to be mad at cops, he thinks people are not taking it to the politicians who are in charge of... well, it gets kinda stupid after that since he also said Trump was gonna kick the bad politicians out and he really thought the police would do it, but attacking the systems is exactly what's being done, BUT WHATEVER, he's literally against Chauvin getting convicted because he's seen people on drugs, but his bias is believing uninformed or flat out fake endorsements of progressive ideology are real, and real progressive movements are fake and run by politicians he doesn't trust, which is somehow everybody but Trump. He's a smart dude, but he played his hand when he got excited and validated today about a fake meme of Chauvin being acquitted. Like, come on, dude, who sold you that crock? It's a jury trial. It doesn't look good for the prosecution in the Chauvin case, but don't care about it if you "don't care about it." We all know why you care about it now, you tacit fascist. There is something in the Q belief book that we'll never get. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 05:24, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
- In a sense, Qanon reminds me of a religion, or what will fulfill the psychological impulses that lead to religion as the notion of theism itself becomes less tenable-Flandres (talk) 01:37, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
- These belief systems, if you can call them that, are Rube Goldberg organizations of rational thought. Humans have a natural propensity to concatenate ideas and have little or no skill at deontology and evince a "bombs away" teleology. Modern mythologies are the basis for unempirical histories. Do they believe it? Some do, the idiots, others are amused by the way educated people are annoyed by preposterous suppositions such as a child molestation ring centered in a pizza parlor and hosted by Hilary Clinton. Still others co-opt the movements to transport their individual goals and projects. Myth and unsubstantiated supposition drives them. And we are all capable of being idiots on occasion. Ariel31459 (talk) 19:57, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
- Alternative explanation: A Game Designer's Analysis Of QAnon. (I found that link elsewhere on RW.) The brilliant work of authoritarian ideologists skilled in psychological warfare. Carefully designed for larger-than-life meaning, and a mirror image of a massive multiplayer game, extending to encompass all of life when engaged per the instructions, through the predictable workings of cognitive biases. If the storyplanners only care about the big picture of what belief in the story leads people to support, then they can make the evolution of the story a very open-ended affair where most of the creative power comes from the crowd of participants. Whenever people solving the mystery evolve the story in a new direction, the next round of clues given to them can be tailored to what they now "know", adapting the storyplanning to create a more thrilling and immersive adventure. --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 13:56, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Can anyone reccomend me some good critical thinking books[edit]
'Hi,
Does anyone have any recommendations on skepticism and critical thinking, especially slanted towards young-earth creationism and biblical-literacy. I've read Shermer's Why People Believe Weird things, and I'm going to read The Demon-Haunted World.— Unsigned, by: 51.148.181.72 / talk
- Both are good. You might also like this which will be a bit more up to date. (And please sign your posts.) Cheers. :-) Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 10:48, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- The best book on critical thinking and thinking in general that I have read is The Thinker's Way: 8 Steps to a Richer Life by John Chafee, Ph.D. I highly recommend it.S'chn T'gai Spock (talk) 11:05, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- John Chaffee taught City University of New York courses on thinking to thousands of people for the past 20 years. He offers a thorough, detailed methodology for analyzing complex issues which includes: evaluating evidence, solving problems creatively and making informed choices. Amazon has 84 used books of The Thinker's Way: 8 Steps to a Richer Life by John Chafee, Ph.D. starting at 36 cents so that is a bargain.S'chn T'gai Spock (talk) 11:15, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- User:Bob_M previously recommended The Skeptics' Guide to the Universe, which I myself plan to read soon. Bongolian (talk) 18:47, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- John Chaffee taught City University of New York courses on thinking to thousands of people for the past 20 years. He offers a thorough, detailed methodology for analyzing complex issues which includes: evaluating evidence, solving problems creatively and making informed choices. Amazon has 84 used books of The Thinker's Way: 8 Steps to a Richer Life by John Chafee, Ph.D. starting at 36 cents so that is a bargain.S'chn T'gai Spock (talk) 11:15, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- The best book on critical thinking and thinking in general that I have read is The Thinker's Way: 8 Steps to a Richer Life by John Chafee, Ph.D. I highly recommend it.S'chn T'gai Spock (talk) 11:05, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Should abortion be legalized worldwide?[edit]
What do you think? Imo it should be legal only under certain circumstances. Kevs Ping! 12:13, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- This sums up my opinions well. I know it's long, but I think it provides a nuanced conception of a hot-button issue. IveBeenFrank (talk) 12:19, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- Around the world the anti-abortionists seem to be gaining strength.[2] Besides Ireland, is there any part of the world where the pro-choice advocates are gaining strength?S'chn T'gai Spock (talk) 12:40, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Kevlarstar Should guns be legal? ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 12:53, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- Broadly speaking, Latin America, Asia, and Africa have trended toward broadening abortion legality. (1) It has tightened in a few areas of course, but that's not really the trend du jour.
- In addition, now that safe early abortions can be provided in pill form (mifepristone and misoprostol), organizations have popped up to help deliver this medication to less developed backwater areas, the main places where abortion law is restrictive (this includes certain parts of the United States these days :p ).
- My experience in the United States is that so called "pro life" people tend not to give a shit about the baby after they are born, so I refrain from further commentary on abortion until this changes. PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 12:56, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- @GrammarCommieYes, but they should be regulated. But what do you think about legalizing abortions? Do you support or oppose it? Kevs Ping! 12:58, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Kevlarstar You just answered your own question. If guns, mechanical devices which were invented for the sole purpose of maiming and killing human beings should be legalized, then so too should abortions, which are a medically approved procedure that multiple medical ethics boards have signed off on. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 13:30, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- It shouldn't be handed off like candy to random people. That is why there is a school shooting epidemic in America in the first place. MarioSuperstar77 (talk) 13:33, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- @MarioSuperstar77 The point is that weapons of death and pain are far graver a moral ill than a procedure that's been approved by medical ethics boards, who's job it is to stop unethical medical procedures. And yet people are hell bent on broadening access to guns, the aforementioned instrument, than abortion, the medical procedure. Of course, nominally we'd also have programs for contraceptives, scientific sex ed, and family planning, de-stigmatized rape counseling and reporting, alongside a strong welfare system, but most people who decry abortion appose those things so, meh. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 13:40, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- It shouldn't be handed off like candy to random people. That is why there is a school shooting epidemic in America in the first place. MarioSuperstar77 (talk) 13:33, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Kevlarstar You just answered your own question. If guns, mechanical devices which were invented for the sole purpose of maiming and killing human beings should be legalized, then so too should abortions, which are a medically approved procedure that multiple medical ethics boards have signed off on. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 13:30, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Kevlarstar Should guns be legal? ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 12:53, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- Around the world the anti-abortionists seem to be gaining strength.[2] Besides Ireland, is there any part of the world where the pro-choice advocates are gaining strength?S'chn T'gai Spock (talk) 12:40, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- While I believe a decision should not be forced on the mother, I also think it should be morally discouraged unless necessary (I acknowledge that there are circumstances where it is needed.) MeowPurr 13:56, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
I don't understand the difference between the question "Should abortion be legal?" and "Should abortion be legal worldwide?" In any event the answer is "yes". But if you want your opinion immortalized go to : Essay:Where do you fall in the abortion debate? and add an opioion.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 14:05, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- The Guttmacher Institute article that PanGalacticGargleBlaster cited said about misoprostol: "Its use is now common in much of Latin America and the Caribbean, a region in which nearly every country has highly restrictive abortion laws. The same source said that Mexico City and Uruguay/Santa Lucia recently liberalized abortion laws. But Uruguay/Santa Lucia seem to have merely allowed abortion to protect a mother's life and/or physical health.
- But what is happening in other Latin American countries where evangelicalism is growing? Evangelicals are anti-abortion. In Brazil, where evangelicalism is growing, the Brazil Supreme Court and the Brazilian legislative are duking it out. The Brazillian Supreme Court has liberalized abortion law, but the legislative branch is restricting abortion law.[3]
- Africa seems to be making modest liberalization of abortion laws. The Guttmacher Institute says: "And of the 13 Sub-Saharan African nations that changed their laws since 2000, six—Benin, Central African Republic, Chad, Lesotho, Niger and Togo—moved from prohibition to allowing abortion to protect life and physical health, or across two categories of the continuum." But in Africa, evangelicalism is growing.
- "Euractiv is an independent pan-European media network specialised in EU policies, founded in 1999 by the French media publisher Christophe Leclercq. Its headquarters and central editorial staff are located in Brussels.... EURACTIV's reporting is regularly quoted by international newspapers such as The New York Times, the Financial Times, CNN, Le Point and Il Post."[4] So it is a mainstream news source.
- Euractiv says:
- "Across the world, the pro-life movement seems to be gaining strength. According to the latest figures 26 countries around the world prohibit abortion altogether, including Congo-Brazzaville, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Gabon, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Madagascar, Mauritania, Nicaragua, Palau, Philippines, Senegal and Suriname.
- In October, 32 countries signed the Geneva Consensus Declaration, a pledge to protect women and defend life.
- The controversial document, co-sponsored by the US, Brazil, Egypt, Indonesia, Hungary and Uganda, states that “there is no international right to abortion” while tackling the promotion of equal rights for women and the need for universal health coverage.
- The other signatories were Bahrain, Belarus, Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Congo, Djibouti, Eswatini, Gambia, Haiti, Iraq, Kenya, Kuwait, Libya, Nauru, Niger, Oman, Pakistan, Poland, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, South Sudan, Sudan, the United Arab Emirates and Zambia."[5]S'chn T'gai Spock (talk) 14:07, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- Starting to show your sock, eh? The Geneva Consensus Declaration was a pet project of Mike Pompeo to ass-kiss the US religious right and it is no surprise that it attracted mainly African and Islamic authoritarian despots with shitty records on how women are treated. You should've used Islam if your point was that growth of religions hostile to abortion is going to reduce abortion availability in the future, Islam's growing faster than Christianity. With countries like Argentina recently legalizing abortion, your statements on Latin America don't make much sense either. PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 14:26, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- Liane Cartman, in a particularly interesting episode of South Park asked a fairly interesting question on the abortion debate. This was: Liane tries to get abortion legalised in her state even sleeping with the governor to try and pull it off...only to find out that the government isn't willing to legalise abortion up to 10 years after the child is born (the age of her son Eric). It seems that, there is probably nowhere in the world that is progressive enough that they will legalise abortion for a developing baby that is already in elementary school. ShabiDOO 14:36, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- Wait, are you guys talking about all countries legalizing it on their own, or some top down declaration legalizing it everywhere?-Flandres (talk) 14:56, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Flandres Based on the stated positions thus far, I suspect the question is whether abortion should be legal, period. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 15:02, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- Wait, are you guys talking about all countries legalizing it on their own, or some top down declaration legalizing it everywhere?-Flandres (talk) 14:56, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- Starting to show your sock, eh? The Geneva Consensus Declaration
- The other signatories were Bahrain, Belarus, Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Congo, Djibouti, Eswatini, Gambia, Haiti, Iraq, Kenya, Kuwait, Libya, Nauru, Niger, Oman, Pakistan, Poland, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, South Sudan, Sudan, the United Arab Emirates and Zambia."[5]S'chn T'gai Spock (talk) 14:07, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
The religions which are the most restrictive against abortion are fundamentalist Christianity and Islam.
I don't know whether Islam and Christianity is growing faster. Wikipedia says: "Counting the number of converts to a religion is difficult, because some national censuses ask people about their religion, but they do not ask if they have converted to their present faith, and in some countries, legal and social consequences make conversion difficult, such as death sentence of openly leaving Islam in some Muslim countries...Some religions proselytise vigorously (Christianity and Islam, for example), others (such as Judaism) do not generally encourage conversions into their ranks."[6]
A lot of the places where Islam and Christianity are growing are poor countries or countries that do not have much freedom so the data is limited to some extent. So it's a tough call as far as which of the two religions is the fastest growing. As far as which religion is going to grow fastest in the future, that is even more speculative as a number of demographic/social variables are at play.S'chn T'gai Spock (talk) 15:03, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- The reason I didn't comment much on the growth of Islam/Christianity/fundamentist Christianity in Africa is that I didn't know much about it. Pew Research says, "Sub-Saharan Africa also is home to a growing share of the world's Muslims. Between 2015 and 2060, the share of all Muslims living in the region is projected to increase from 16% to 27%."[7] Wikipedia says about Christian growth in Africa/elsewhere: "The paper concludes that the Pentecostalism movement is the fastest-growing religion worldwide. Protestantism is growing as a result of historic missionary activity and indigenous Christian movements by Africans in Africa, and due primarily to conversion in Asia, Latin America, Muslim world, and Oceania. By 2050, Christianity is expected to remain the majority of population and the largest religious group in Latin America and Caribbean (89%), North America (66%), Europe (65.2%) and Sub Saharan Africa (59%)."[8]S'chn T'gai Spock (talk) 15:26, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- As far as Argentina, it leans to the left so the fact that it liberalized abortion is not unexpected.
- Wikipedia's article Conservative wave says: "The conservative wave (Portuguese: onda conservadora; Spanish: ola conservadora), or blue tide, is a right-wing political phenomenon that emerged in the mid-2010s in Latin America as a direct reaction to the pink tide. After a decade of leftist governments, their influence has declined as in Argentina the conservative liberal Mauricio Macri succeeded the Peronist Cristina Fernández de Kirchner in 2015; in Brazil, there was Dilma Rousseff's impeachment process that resulted in Rouseff's departure and the rise of her Vice President Michel Temer to power in 2016; in Chile the conservative Sebastián Piñera succeeded the socialist Michelle Bachelet in 2017 just as it was in 2009; and in 2018 the far-right congressman Jair Bolsonaro became 38th President of Brazil. The conservative phenomenon has been compared with the election of Donald Trump as president of the United States, the appointment of Narendra Modi as the prime minister of India, and the growth of the right-wing populism and neo-nationalism in Europe as similar phenomena. The growing numbers and influence of strongly socially conservative and prosperity theology-believers among the evangelical Christian communities in Latin America has also been pointed as one of the factors behind the phenomenon."[9]
- So this is why I questioned whether or not pro-choice advocates are gaining much or any traction in Latin America.S'chn T'gai Spock (talk) 15:41, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Let's flip the "debate" on its head[edit]
Why shouldn't abortion be legal to those that want it or need it? ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 14:51, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- Because it‘s „murder“, according to Pro-Lifers. Kevs Ping! 15:56, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- Ben Franklin used a weighted analysis method of solving difficult problems. He would make two lists - one with the pros and one with the cons. He would then give a weight to each pro and con. And then he would add up the weighted pros and cons.
- So what are the pros and cons of legalizing abortion or making it illegal and how weighty is each pro/con.
- And to what extent should abortion be legalized or be made illegal?
- And how important are the needs vs. the wants of legalizing abortion or making it illegal?Rathmelders (talk) 16:06, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Kevlarstar "Pro-lifers" are scientifically illiterate morons and blatant hypocrites. Additionally, "murder" is a legal charge, and without the prerequisite laws is a meaningless accusation. And that's without going into the fact that laws are based on beliefs and philosophical arguments, not the other way around. @Rathmelders You're trying to flip the issue back around. I'm asking why it shouldn't be legal. What does the opposing camp have in the way of arguments that's worth a damn? ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 16:32, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- OK. I will be the first out on the Ben Franklin weighted analysis dance floor of making decisions.
- @Kevlarstar "Pro-lifers" are scientifically illiterate morons and blatant hypocrites. Additionally, "murder" is a legal charge, and without the prerequisite laws is a meaningless accusation. And that's without going into the fact that laws are based on beliefs and philosophical arguments, not the other way around. @Rathmelders You're trying to flip the issue back around. I'm asking why it shouldn't be legal. What does the opposing camp have in the way of arguments that's worth a damn? ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 16:32, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- And how important are the needs vs. the wants of legalizing abortion or making it illegal?Rathmelders (talk) 16:06, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- In developed countries and in China where abortion was made legal it is or will potentially strain the social safety net for the aged since fewer younger people were born to support their aging populations. I give that an 8 out of 10 weight.Rathmelders (talk) 16:40, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- That's a massive misrepresentation of the data. Firstly, the PRC didn't just legalize abortion, it also instituted various mandatory population control programs, including the "One Child" policy. This is hardly comparable to legalizing a procedure and letting patients decide whether or not to utilize it. Try again. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 16:46, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- In developed countries and in China where abortion was made legal it is or will potentially strain the social safety net for the aged since fewer younger people were born to support their aging populations. I give that an 8 out of 10 weight.Rathmelders (talk) 16:40, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
China's demographic winter is more severe than say Euruope because it forced its population control policies on its population, I will grant you that.
"The growing number and share of older people within society poses a range of economic challenges. Some analysts suggest that population ageing will likely exert downward pressure on economic growth, reduce labour supply, lead to higher (age-related) social costs and impact on the sustainability of government finances. These arguments are centred on the assumption that the old-age dependency ratio — in other words, the number of older people relative to the size of the working-age population — will continue to rise. As this ratio increases, there is a decline in the size of the workforce that is potentially available to take care of the older generations and this has already led to an increased burden on government finances, changes to the statutory retirement age and lower levels of pension provision." - European Union publication[10]
France, Hungary and other nations have tried to boost their birth rates through incentives with limited to no success. France and Hungary have had the most success in raising birth rates, but their success is limited. It is difficult to raise a nation's birth rate. Abortion lowers a nation's birth rate.Rathmelders (talk) 17:13, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- One, I've already dismissed your PRC example as a complete non-sequitur, so drop it. Two, I'd like to see scientific papers on whether legalizing abortion significantly lowers the overall birth rate, especially studies that account for immigration and other such forms of population "replenishment". ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 17:25, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- Not always. It's not "scientifically illiterate" to believe that life begins at some point before birth, because it's a philosophical question. It is not a contradiction to oppose abortion but supports the death penalty, and claiming this is the case, ignores that the people on death row have been proven in a court of law to have done something particularly heinous. Nor is it philosophically inconsistent to oppose abortion but refuse to give food to a starving man, as there is a difference between letting someone die and actively killing them. What is a contradiction is refusing to give the homeless man food but making it illegal to pull the plug on a brain-dead coma patient.
- Before modern medicine, the woman's life always was in danger from a pregnancy, and therefore abortion always was an issue of self defense. There still is the risk of injury and so forth even from "healthy" pregnancies, but the better we become with medicine, well, that argument gets weaker and weaker. If there's a 20% chance the person will kill me, I am probably justified in killing to defend myself. But what if that drops to .2%? There's a 1 in 100,000 chance that any random person is a murderer; is it self defense or defense of others to kill a random person because of the .001% chance they will murder someone else?
- What is pseudo-philosophy is a lot of the pro-abortion side. Most start with the conclusion, "abortion should be legal", and work backwards to make it ethical. I'm pro-abortion, but I don't pretend that I don't believe that all lives are equally valuable. I view "human" as a matter of brain function; brain-dead is all-dead, as far as I'm concerned. In the case of fetuses, the brain itself doesn't develop until around 12 weeks, and the brain activity required for "consciousness" doesn't begin until around 24-25 weeks. So for me, abortion should definitely be allowed before 12 weeks (i.e., first trimester), it's really the next 12 weeks (second trimester) that it's questionable. It gets more and more "wrong" the longer you wait, but once it's third trimester then I don't have a problem with it being illegal except for life-or-limb cases. CorruptUser 17:05, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- @CorruptUser When I said they were "scientifically illiterate" meant primarily their understanding of the reproductive process. Scientifically and medically, the offspring isn't considered an infant until around the third trimester. Insisting that a fetus and infant are one and the same, therefor, is scientifically illiterate. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 17:12, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- In an idea world, I would echo CorruptUser's opinions (which are pretty close to mine), and note that things like various fetal birth defects pose some tricky moral questions when debated in a sober manner. But abortion is rarely debated in a sober manner, and you usually end up with a bunch of hotheaded talking heads yelling at each other. So I'm sort of over the "debate", to be honest. It's usually not honest.
- If you look at surveys, I would "generalize" and say that the top two reasons women elect to get an abortion are: A) socioeconomic reasons; B) family planning. So it's pretty clear that there would be a helluv a lot less abortions if education and access to family planning tools was widespread, and socioeconomic issues were resolved. We aren't there yet. In fact, in the United States, the "pro-life" party tends to be actively against such things. Go figure.
- Some articles have speculated that the sex abuse scandal is why is now legal in Ireland. To be honest, considering the shit that the Irish Catholic church did with "illegitimate" children in "the good ol' days" (going along with all the other history of child abuse cases there that spans to modern time), and you're like, shit, pro life my ass. Sanctity of the unborn, abuse of the born and their mothers. The Catholic Church honestly has no moral authority on this matter anymore, frankly.
- So I'm sort of over abortion as topic. Wake me up, pro lifers, when you actually give a flying fuck about helping the children of the poor, like what Jesus actually told you to do. Then maybe your opinion on abortion might count some. PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 17:39, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- From a utilitarian perspective, it might be possible to justify a right to have an abortion without justifying a right to guarantee the death of the fetus. Utilitarianism requires neutrality across time, so even if the fetus isn't currently a conscious person, with all the associated moral standing and distinct capacities, there is good reason to believe that it can develop into such a person under the right conditions. Thus, from a utilitarian perspective, if the fetus can be kept alive after an abortion, it may be ethically required to do so. Compare the case of somebody in a coma who has a high chance of regaining consciousness. Obviously, this raises even more ethical questions, such as are related to the subsequent care of the child, but it is one of the more intriguing views I've encountered. Serene (talk) 17:49, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Serene There's someone missing from your example, something which affects the outcome. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 17:55, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- I would like to echo what PGGB said-debates over abortion are usually more informed by emotion than thought. I'm sure they are worth having somehow, but it stuns me personally that people invest so much effort into something that will give so little in return.-Flandres (talk) 18:10, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- @GrammarCommie I assume you are referring to the coma example and the mother, but from a purely utilitarian perspective (one which, I should note, I do not endorse), this isn't necessarily even relevant in the case of abortion. You could argue that even if the mother wants nothing to do with the child, under the medical scenario I put forward, then it becomes a charge of the state. A purely utilitarian standpoint has a hard time dealing with special obligations and relationships; admitting that they exist poses issues for the utility calculus. Many would say you should divert the trolley even if your own child is on the other track, and that your intuitions about this are simply wrong if you think you shouldn't do this. If separating the child from their birth mother is inherently objectionable, it might only be because we expect that they would be worse cared for, but this might only indicate that we are already not fulfilling our obligations to children and should do more. Serene (talk) 18:50, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- I can also give a go at properly playing devils advocate. Although the fetus cannot live independently (in some cases, as late in pregnancy and increasingly early with modern medical care), it is alive, and like all living things therefore has a prima facie right to life. Also, the mother has a prima facie right to bodily autonomy, which stands in conflict with the fetus' right to life. Not that there is no need to attach personhood to the fetus; we imagine that, for instance, a cat is not a person, but it would nevertheless be prima facie wrong to kill one. In order for abortion to be justified, the mother's right to bodily autonomy must be all-things-considered greater than the fetal right to life. Now, it is important to clarify what a right to life refers to. It is not a right to have others give their life to protect your own: nobody is obligated to kill themselves to save another. A doctor would be wrong to kill a patient in order to donate their organs to other people: this we take as obvious. The right to life is a negative right: you must not interfere with my ability to live. Consequently, if the pregnancy poses a threat to the life of the mother, we cannot object to abortion: the fetal right to life is not a right to the death of the mother. A comparable argument could be used for the case of rape. This system is largely particularist, and so demands that each case be evaluated on its own merits. If the mother is healthy, is in a stable and healthy relationship, and can reasonably expect to remain in good economic standing even with a child, it becomes much more difficult to argue that she has an overriding interest that justifies the abortion, so long as the fetus dies as a side effect. Note that even though this is not a utilitarian system, we can again reach that conclusion that the right abortion does not equate to the right to guarantee the death of the fetus. If the fetus can be kept alive outside the mother's body, then its right to life no longer conflicts with the mother's right to bodily autonomy. Again, even if the mother refuses to raise it, it could perhaps be cared for by somebody else, and if this care is expected to be inadequate, that may simply reflect a societal failure to meet our ethical obligations.
- As for what I actually believe, in the context of the United States, I think Roe v. Wade made a good decision in treating it as a medical issue rather than an ethical issue. Comparably weighty ethical decisions are made frequently without the government getting involved, and I see no justification for the special treatment. Furthermore, I am neither a strict utilitarian nor a believer in divine command theory. If a particular cutoff must be chosen, I would endorse something around the 22-23 week mark. This is just before brain activity indicative of consciousness begins, and having the cutoff slightly earlier ensures against even the most significant outliers becoming conscious before the abortion. It is also far enough into the pregnancy that I think it is reasonable to expect that the mother should be aware of the pregnancy by that point. I would also support later cutoffs for instances of threat to the mother's life, rape, and incest. Serene (talk) 18:49, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- I would like to echo what PGGB said-debates over abortion are usually more informed by emotion than thought. I'm sure they are worth having somehow, but it stuns me personally that people invest so much effort into something that will give so little in return.-Flandres (talk) 18:10, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Serene There's someone missing from your example, something which affects the outcome. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 17:55, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- From a utilitarian perspective, it might be possible to justify a right to have an abortion without justifying a right to guarantee the death of the fetus. Utilitarianism requires neutrality across time, so even if the fetus isn't currently a conscious person, with all the associated moral standing and distinct capacities, there is good reason to believe that it can develop into such a person under the right conditions. Thus, from a utilitarian perspective, if the fetus can be kept alive after an abortion, it may be ethically required to do so. Compare the case of somebody in a coma who has a high chance of regaining consciousness. Obviously, this raises even more ethical questions, such as are related to the subsequent care of the child, but it is one of the more intriguing views I've encountered. Serene (talk) 17:49, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- @CorruptUser When I said they were "scientifically illiterate" meant primarily their understanding of the reproductive process. Scientifically and medically, the offspring isn't considered an infant until around the third trimester. Insisting that a fetus and infant are one and the same, therefor, is scientifically illiterate. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 17:12, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- The Utilitarian aspect gets more complicated with something fairly recent in Utilitarian thought, the "Repugnant Conclusion".
- Let's say you have an island paradise, with some people all living fantastic lives, inequality is effectively non-existent. Let's call this "case A". Now you another island pop up, blocked off from the first island, that has some very poor people whose lives are only barely worth living, though there is little inequality on this island. Let's call this "case A-". Now some of the resources of the first island are magically transported to the second island, and so everyone is living an equally decent life, but not quite as high a quality of life as the first island in Case A. Let's call this "Case B+". Now, an isthmus forms between the two islands, and they are just 1 island, with no inequality, this will be Case B. Now let's repeat this process, all the way until Case Z, where there's a huge, overpopulated continent where people live lives slightly better than simply dying. In each step of the way, every case appears to be an improvement over the last, yet the resulting "repugnant conclusion" is that an overpopulated hellhole is a superior situation to a small island paradise.
- Where is the flaw? Because that does describe the world we live in, and it's a huge question in both the immigration and abortion debate. We'd certainly be better off in the scenario where unwanted babies or refugees/illegal-immigrants/etc didn't exist, but they do exist, and it's not exactly moral to kill them even if it results in life being better for us. CorSock (talk) 18:50, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- I am familiar with the repugnant conclusion, and I think it's a pretty good objection. One reply to it is that we should seek not to increase total utility, but average utility, so that an increase in total utility, as by increasing the population, that reduces the average person's utility would be wrong. The obvious objection to this is that it means you should kill unhappy people. Perhaps we should take only actions that increase both total and average utility? Serene (talk) 18:53, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Was moving the 2021 MLB All Star Game the good decision?[edit]
Short answer: no. This move was I'm sure done with good intent, but it's totally punishing the wrong people. This article is a great read for anyone who wants an informed opinion on the matter. The first few paragraphs make it clear that it's not at all written from a pro-Trump stance (opposite from it in fact) yet still argues that moving the game was a dumbass thing to do. Aaronmichael5 01:51, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
- It's performative bullshit. Sports are sports, not politics, and baseball has exactly nothing to do with the issue at hand. I know I'm a minority for someone my age, but (short of criminal activity or similar) I absolutely do not care about what teams and athletes do outside of their sports; if I support something, it's because I agree with the cause and not some guy who's talented at a sport. And in this case they're actively hurting one of their own franchises, so it's the ultimate Plaxico Burress move. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 04:08, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
- Full disclosure, I have a personal grudge against baseball as the worst sport. It's a game where a bunch of guys stand in a field hoping nothing happens, and those are just the players. I have no idea how it's legal to sell beer at those games, the fuck else are you gonna do for nine innings? That's entrapment. Baseball is the worst sport. Anyway, putting my personal vendetta against baseball aside, to pretend like state economy doesn't include big franchises and tourism, blowing off sport is not really respecting capitalism's firm grasp on democracy. But protesting voting restrictions as a club, basically a union, and saying "Sorry, but if Georgia is going to do this voting restriction nonsense and we as a brand can't justify that decision, we won't be based there" is exactly what brand power is all about. Crying that it hurts people who aren't baseball players, well, that's what a strike is supposed to do. Moving it, instead of just cancelling it, is, well, a pretty lateral move that won't affect much. It's kind of strange to say "the Braves said they were 'deeply disappointed'" but that's team sports putting out a statement. I mean the whole power structure of capitalism is to limit capital to the things you don't like. I doubt the players in the MLB are fans of Georgia's ruling, and they probably want to see something done. The MLB is playing by the rules. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 05:04, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
- I'm unclear as to how this will address the problem of voting in Georgia. To me it looks like slacktivism, it's a big publicity stunt that does nothing about the stated issue. I have a degree in history, so I don't need a civics lesson from a sports league. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 16:41, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
- It is performative to some extent, but the problem started with the idiot CEO of Delta Airlines, Ed Bastian, who claimed to have influence over the legislators and hence the outcome of the bill, that it was not as bad as it could have been. Once one claims influence, one is ripe for punishment. Oh, Delta had influence, then why didn't every other large company in Georgia also have influence? Their CEOs are highly paid super-geniuses who got their positions by meritocracy (and not the good-old-boy network) after all, right — well, that's the storyline anyway. Supposedly boycotts don't have much effect on sales but they do have a big potential effect on finding actual talented workers. Bongolian (talk) 18:57, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
- No. Gridiron football is objectively the worst possible sport. For one thing, it is played outdoors from October through February. Baseball games are called for rain. Football carries on in the blizzard, under conditions that turn the game from a display of prowess into low comedy. Then there are the horrific injuries that are routine in the game. That said, when a multi-million dollar enterprise Takes a Stand on a public issue, I am highly confident that they did so because they did the math first and figured it would play well with the people who pay the bills. Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱsos. 04:31, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
- I'm unclear as to how this will address the problem of voting in Georgia. To me it looks like slacktivism, it's a big publicity stunt that does nothing about the stated issue. I have a degree in history, so I don't need a civics lesson from a sports league. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 16:41, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
- Full disclosure, I have a personal grudge against baseball as the worst sport. It's a game where a bunch of guys stand in a field hoping nothing happens, and those are just the players. I have no idea how it's legal to sell beer at those games, the fuck else are you gonna do for nine innings? That's entrapment. Baseball is the worst sport. Anyway, putting my personal vendetta against baseball aside, to pretend like state economy doesn't include big franchises and tourism, blowing off sport is not really respecting capitalism's firm grasp on democracy. But protesting voting restrictions as a club, basically a union, and saying "Sorry, but if Georgia is going to do this voting restriction nonsense and we as a brand can't justify that decision, we won't be based there" is exactly what brand power is all about. Crying that it hurts people who aren't baseball players, well, that's what a strike is supposed to do. Moving it, instead of just cancelling it, is, well, a pretty lateral move that won't affect much. It's kind of strange to say "the Braves said they were 'deeply disappointed'" but that's team sports putting out a statement. I mean the whole power structure of capitalism is to limit capital to the things you don't like. I doubt the players in the MLB are fans of Georgia's ruling, and they probably want to see something done. The MLB is playing by the rules. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 05:04, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
- Depends upon whether you are playing a finite game. Probably nothing will change the minds of the Republican legislature, even political defeat is unlikely to convert their incorrigible instincts for corrupt politics. However, in the long run, other states may discover brakes are put on their similar plans to limit democracy. And I would call that better.Ariel31459 (talk) 19:16, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
- Look at it this way, major companies and events pulling out of Georgia means that the state of Georgia shot itself in the foot. They loose mountains of money from businesses and attractions. --Eggs Over EASyPlus (talk) 21:57, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
- Not a huge fan of football myself, but if it's in a strange personal defense of baseball being the worst sport, which you can believe I will always maintain, exertion leads to core temperatures rising. It would be dangerous to sprint every 40 seconds in summer heat wearing a bunch of pads you can't take off. Would your rather your brains get cooked or smashed? It would be silly to claim football is too hard to play at the professional level in rain, snow, or mud, since every player is affected. Asking a pitcher to sacrifice his elbow and shoulder so that absolutely nothing happens during a sports game is a little fucked up. Being said, Coca-Cola spoke up, Delta spoke up, not because they are great and powerful influencers, but because they also did the math and it's fucking gross to be on the wrong side here. Brand performance is so low stakes. Actually making sure people can vote is somehow off-brand for republicans right now. That's fucking gross. I have a lot of friends who like baseball. My personal brand is I hate baseball and it's fun because I'm not trying to stop baseball. There is nothing anybody can say or do to get me to enjoy baseball. Also, everybody has an impossible hill to climb if anybody wants me to endorse voter suppression. It's not a difficult position to take. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 02:43, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- Hopping in here to say that sport is inherently political, and anyone that says differently has obviously never heard of the Olympics, or the FIFA World Cup, or the FIBA World Cup, etc.-RipCityLiberal (talk) 19:23, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
- Not a huge fan of football myself, but if it's in a strange personal defense of baseball being the worst sport, which you can believe I will always maintain, exertion leads to core temperatures rising. It would be dangerous to sprint every 40 seconds in summer heat wearing a bunch of pads you can't take off. Would your rather your brains get cooked or smashed? It would be silly to claim football is too hard to play at the professional level in rain, snow, or mud, since every player is affected. Asking a pitcher to sacrifice his elbow and shoulder so that absolutely nothing happens during a sports game is a little fucked up. Being said, Coca-Cola spoke up, Delta spoke up, not because they are great and powerful influencers, but because they also did the math and it's fucking gross to be on the wrong side here. Brand performance is so low stakes. Actually making sure people can vote is somehow off-brand for republicans right now. That's fucking gross. I have a lot of friends who like baseball. My personal brand is I hate baseball and it's fun because I'm not trying to stop baseball. There is nothing anybody can say or do to get me to enjoy baseball. Also, everybody has an impossible hill to climb if anybody wants me to endorse voter suppression. It's not a difficult position to take. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 02:43, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- Look at it this way, major companies and events pulling out of Georgia means that the state of Georgia shot itself in the foot. They loose mountains of money from businesses and attractions. --Eggs Over EASyPlus (talk) 21:57, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
Went to a Podiatrist today and found out something interesting[edit]
I mentioned about the pain in my foot from when I fell back in late 2019. Now here is what is interesting: when I initially fell I actually broke my foot and it never healed properly. The ER doctor told me that it was merely a sprain but that was not the case. So I have been walking on a broken foot that did not heal properly. That is why the X-Ray showed only a fracture.
It gets better- I need an MRI to see if there was an Achilles Tendon rupture. If there was a rupture I will need surgery to fix the problem! How in the fuck did the ER doctor miss a broken foot (which he hit into while he walked and did not apologize)? I have been suffering for over a year! The ER doctor did not give any bandaging or anti-inflammatory medicine. --Eggs Over EASyPlus (talk) 16:54, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
- Lawyer up! Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱsos. 17:29, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
- You serious? That was in 2019. --Eggs Over EASyPlus (talk) 21:59, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
- If you get surgery done, remind your doctor to operate on the correct foot. There are cases where doctors operate on the wrong foot, leg, arm. hand or eye. Better safe than sorry. I told my surgical team to do this in a joking way for an operation I had. But I was not joking.S'chn T'gai Spock (talk) 08:14, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- State laws vary widely, and some (like Indiana) don't really have a legal remedy for medical malpractice any more. But many operate on the discovery principle, which doesn't start the clock ticking until you learn what went wrong back then. A local lawyer will know whether it's worth pursuing. Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱsos. 15:47, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- I would not be able to afford a lawyer and because that I am considered (mentally) disabled, I get disability. If I have more than $2000 in assets then I lose disability and my health insurance until I spend down under $2000. Welcome to the USA where if you are poor then you better stay poor. --Possible KGB Spy (Eyes Shift) (talk) 23:08, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- Yeah, that's a sore topic for me; working with disabled adults I see the effect of that a lot, and they haven't adjusted that ceiling since 1989. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 01:11, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
- I would not be able to afford a lawyer and because that I am considered (mentally) disabled, I get disability. If I have more than $2000 in assets then I lose disability and my health insurance until I spend down under $2000. Welcome to the USA where if you are poor then you better stay poor. --Possible KGB Spy (Eyes Shift) (talk) 23:08, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- State laws vary widely, and some (like Indiana) don't really have a legal remedy for medical malpractice any more. But many operate on the discovery principle, which doesn't start the clock ticking until you learn what went wrong back then. A local lawyer will know whether it's worth pursuing. Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱsos. 15:47, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- If you get surgery done, remind your doctor to operate on the correct foot. There are cases where doctors operate on the wrong foot, leg, arm. hand or eye. Better safe than sorry. I told my surgical team to do this in a joking way for an operation I had. But I was not joking.S'chn T'gai Spock (talk) 08:14, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- You serious? That was in 2019. --Eggs Over EASyPlus (talk) 21:59, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
TRUMP VS THE ILLUMINATI[edit]
Everyone MUST see this movie ASAP. COMING STRAIGHT TO THE GAS STATION RACK TO THEATERS NEAR YOU Aaronmichael5 03:25, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- Man, the Illuminati does a lot of pro-bono work for the benefit of mankind. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 14:05, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
- Godzilla vs. Kong vs. Trump vs. The Illuminati: Dawn of Justice Gangster Computer God (talk) 14:54, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
- YAAAAAS, DADDY TRUMP WILL SAVE AMERICA WITH THE QANON PATRIOTS AND JEXUA WILL COM BACK AND SAVE TRUE CHRISTIANS!
Rockford the Roe boop my snootpraise Oscar Wilde 15:23, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
- “The Election: Revolutions.” We open with adrenochrome-fueled Clinton clones threatening to overwhelm the Vatican, until the Pope reminds them he drinks the stuff too, and we’re left without an appropriate Christian citadel for the forces of darkness to storm. Cue five minutes of shuffling and exposition, wherein we learn there’s some dissent among adrenochrome drinkers about whether it’s better from poor kids or cancer kids. One Clinton clone prefers Sunny D. Artificius (talk) 17:02, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
- YAAAAAS, DADDY TRUMP WILL SAVE AMERICA WITH THE QANON PATRIOTS AND JEXUA WILL COM BACK AND SAVE TRUE CHRISTIANS!
- Godzilla vs. Kong vs. Trump vs. The Illuminati: Dawn of Justice Gangster Computer God (talk) 14:54, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
Fetal Alcohol Syndrome[edit]
I know Kaitlin Bennett sounds and acts like a real and regular person, but I really don't think she is capable of understanding anything complex, at least in real time. I have said this before, the lady has Fetal Alcohol Syndrome. I am not being an asshole here, I am literally defending the lady.
She regularly slurs her speech, she has an inhibited ability to understand causal relationships, like she doesn't get a joke is a joke. I have worked with a very sweet gentleman who exhibits all these traits. If you want to get physical, she's got a short nose and thin upper lip and doesn't quite get why she's having her picture taken while she's pretending to cut carrots.
I absolutely have adult alcohol syndrome, but I am really worried we are piling on a girl who literally has reduced mental faculties here even if she doesn't present them in an easy to parse way. It happened at my work with a very sweet gentleman. He could talk and listen, but when you understood he could not reason, it was like "ohhhh ok"
Lemme put it this way. I overheard the guy complaining that he had to clean bathrooms, and I was like "well, here we go." He said "And I know why they make me do it, too." and I was like "Holy shit, he knows we think he's [the r slur]." And he says "It's because I do such a good job."
We asked him to do closing duties, which included turning the lights off. Had a guy working late, sweetie turned the lights off. Guy turned the lights back on. Sweetie came around and turned the lights back off. Guy turned the lights on. Sweetheart, oh poor guy sweetheart that everybody really took seriously, said "Who keeps turning these lights on!?!" Then an argument happened, and sweetheart's defense was "I am supposed to turn these lights off" and the guy couldn't explain to him he was still working. Complained to me, I was like "guy, are you stupid? Did you listen to sweetheart? He can't help it, he really literally can't figure out why you keep turning the lights back on."
But if you talk to or interact with the sweetheart, without knowing it, he's just another guy, maybe a bit of a dummy. Which is fine and normal and you run into those people. But if you actually interact with sweetheart, you start to recognize, no, he's not just a dumb guy. There's a real deficit in faculty here.
It's not the point that she can't cook right. The point is, she's seriously running on reduced faculties, and making her a lolcow is easy until you've met some people who are literally, just like, big children. They're just like really big kids. Anybody who says "Greta Thunberg is the most articulate kid with Asperger's I've ever seen, what a crock" also needs to recognize that Kaitlin Bennett is being used for her literal inability to understand any incoming information in real time.
The reason Kaitlin Bennett doesn't get that she's getting dunked on is because she literally doesn't get it. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 03:47, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- A valid point. The application of a consistent standard w/ Bennett and Thunberg is good. I also kind of pity the fact that she has FAS. Good post! Roman Sionis tends to be inactive during summer 18:39, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- Kind of a sour endorsement of the argument, since Aspergers and FAS are completely different, but I did kind of middle neurodiversity to make it easier, so I don't know what I expected. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 04:29, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
- Oh, sorry. I didn't intend offense. Roman Sionis tends to be inactive during summer 23:25, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
- Well that's cute but sorry don't feed the bulldog. No, I'm kidding, I'm saying I messed up. There's a reason professionals don't openly or publicly diagnose mental divergence, and there's a reason I'm not professional. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 04:08, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
- Oh, sorry. I didn't intend offense. Roman Sionis tends to be inactive during summer 23:25, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
- Kind of a sour endorsement of the argument, since Aspergers and FAS are completely different, but I did kind of middle neurodiversity to make it easier, so I don't know what I expected. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 04:29, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
@Gol Sarnitt I would say this whole topic went from zero to ableist really quickly, but it started out as ableist from the get-go. I have family members with fetal alcohol syndrome this is not how it works. Speculating that someone who you don't even personally know as having an intellectual disability is gross, stop. She is a college graduate stop playing armchair pediatrician. She is just a shitty person, no need to make it about disability. Just because you are familiar with the behaviour of one person with FAS does not give you the intellectual authority to diagnose others. Also, way to directly imply folks with FAS aren't real people "I know Kaitlin Bennett sounds and acts like a real and regular person". Also censoring yourself with "and I was like 'Holy shit, he knows we think he's [the r slur].' doesn't make yourself come off as any less ableist and shitty. - Only Sort of Dumb (talk) 06:20, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
- I agree. I have adult alcohol syndrome, wherein I get drunk and really want to drive a point home. It doesn't make me an expert, it doesn't prove I have any familiarity with the spectrum, and I really do apologize for talking out of my ass. I did choose to censor myself quoting an actual thing I said to myself, I didn't mean for it to seem cool, I meant I honestly said it to myself without getting what was going on at the time, but you're right, bad take. Bennett holds tightly to enough shitty cultural ideas that it makes her a shitty person, and she's a frustrating person, no doubt. If you're comfortable with Bennett being an icon or a lolcow and I'm not, it's 100% my deal. Her autonomy is not something I can directly speak about, since it's nothing I directly know anything about. Yeah, I do feel pretty dumb saying "real person" and that's the language that is most effective when talking to people who get really, like, adult ready to throw hands upset dealing with neurodivergence. Good call out, I appreciate it, and I apologize. I don't have the toolset to deal with this, I appreciate being told I'm a dumbass when I'm being one. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 04:51, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
So my teenage daughter wants to go to a fundie school...[edit]
So long story short, I'm an atheist and absolutely despise fundamentalism and the evangelical movement, and I raised my daughter without religion up until she became friends with this fundie girl she met in Pop Warner in 7th grade, and now they go to the same high school and are in sports together, so are almost always together. This girl knows how I feel about relgion and I wouldn't let her go to this girl's church until she turned 16 last year and got her driver's license and really couldn't do much to stop her short of taking her keys away (I told the pastor there I did NOT want her to get baptized but he did it anyway, asshole), and she's been getting more and more religious since then. She said a while ago that she wants to go to college in Florida with her friend to study nursing, which I'd been slightly supportive of (thinking maybe the professors would talk some sense into them) until I found out she's wanting to go to this ultra Conservative Southern Baptist place called Pensacola Christian College (which you guys have an article on, which is how I found this site) where they don't let girls wear anything but skirts and they teach them young-earth creationism, and I really, really, really do not want her to go there, but I'm afraid if I tell her no she will go anyway and try to pay her own way because they advertise that a kid can go there and work to pay the tuition. I honestly had no idea places like that even existed in mainstream academia. Any ideas on how to discourage this? She is almost 18 and already hates me. — Unsigned, by: 2001:67C:2628:647:12:0:0:204 / talk
- Strange. Very strange, but OK. Maybe accept your daughter's autonomy, while not being so cruel as to love her as something you can always protect, rather to protect her autonomy, and express, I don't know, to yourself, that she is an independent person, and were she to fall into, say a cult or fundie college, she could always come home. And also, highly recommend signing posts on this site, you strange, strange man. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 03:20, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- I certainly wouldn't contribute a cent to my child's education in an albeit accredited yet still intellectually bogus institution. She can pay her own way and work if she really wants. It's a pretty shitty situation and I truly sympathise. You can probably only do your best to dissuade her through reason (might not work) and through self interest (might work) and accept that she might just go. It's a pretty stupid decision if the alternative is going to a better school without having to work. But it's her life to make pointlessly difficult isn't it? So sorry you have to suffer this horror. ShabiDOO 03:45, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- Well, don't try to be forceful on her, because that tends to trigger a rebellious reverse reaction. Just try to, you know, "rationalize" her - i.e. prove to her that all that fundie stuff is BS, debunk it, try to get her into science, etc. MeowPurr 05:47, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- Your daughter is now a committed born again Christian. New converts are more zealous so the more you fight her on this, the more committed she will probably become as she may interpret this as "persecution" so it could make her even more committed to her religion. The vast majority of the courses she will take at that Christian college will be nursing courses or other nonideological courses. There is a big demand for nurses in the USA and the demand is expected to rise so she will have a secure future if she completes her studies. If you get her upset, this could cause her needless problems/distractions during the time she is studying nursing courses. Sometimes in life you have to pick your battles. This isn't a battle worth fighting. If you fight it, you may unnecessarily alienate your daughter and may cause her problems as far as her nursing studies.
- At this point, your best bet is living an ethical life to the best of your ability. In life, actions often speak louder than words. So if you want to positively influence your daughter, I would do this at this juncture.S'chn T'gai Spock (talk) 07:43, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- From what you have said it looks like that horse has bolted and she may be stuck in that worldview for a while. Looking at their statement of faith it certainly does look unutterably dire. On the more positive side the nursing course itself looks legit, with many references to evidence-based activities - which suggests that the Christian nuttiness will be reduced. Sadly, however, their employment opportunity for someone to teach that course suggests otherwise.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 08:05, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- The boomers are getting older and 1/3 of Covid-19 patients turn into long-haulers. Don't mess with your daughter's education. Nursing is a great field to get into. Perhaps a compromise can be struck. You could assist her with the payment of the nursing courses and other nonideological courses. She could pay for the religion classes. Sometimes in life it is better to compromise and get a half a loaf, rather then get no loaf at all.S'chn T'gai Spock (talk) 08:23, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- If your daughter wants to go to a fundie school, I suggest Liberty University or Cedarville University. At least they are regionally accredited. --Possible KGB Spy (Eyes Shift) (talk) 14:43, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- Check how the credits would transfer if the school didn't work out after a couple semesters. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 04:19, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
- If your daughter wants to go to a fundie school, I suggest Liberty University or Cedarville University. At least they are regionally accredited. --Possible KGB Spy (Eyes Shift) (talk) 14:43, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- The boomers are getting older and 1/3 of Covid-19 patients turn into long-haulers. Don't mess with your daughter's education. Nursing is a great field to get into. Perhaps a compromise can be struck. You could assist her with the payment of the nursing courses and other nonideological courses. She could pay for the religion classes. Sometimes in life it is better to compromise and get a half a loaf, rather then get no loaf at all.S'chn T'gai Spock (talk) 08:23, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- From what you have said it looks like that horse has bolted and she may be stuck in that worldview for a while. Looking at their statement of faith it certainly does look unutterably dire. On the more positive side the nursing course itself looks legit, with many references to evidence-based activities - which suggests that the Christian nuttiness will be reduced. Sadly, however, their employment opportunity for someone to teach that course suggests otherwise.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 08:05, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- At this point, your best bet is living an ethical life to the best of your ability. In life, actions often speak louder than words. So if you want to positively influence your daughter, I would do this at this juncture.S'chn T'gai Spock (talk) 07:43, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for the responses. As far as me talking her out of religion, I don't think that's going to happen because she has an IQ of 140 and even though I completely disagree with all of her political and religious views (she likes Donald Trump too), I struggle to refute what she has to say not because she is right but because to be honest she is better with words than I am (she must get that from her dad's genes, which is a long story irrelevant to the situation). Besides that, she's pretty set in her ways. She's always trying to push that fundie stuff on me and trying to get me to read and watch bullshit from Ken Ham and Institute for Creation Research, and she gives out these things called "Chick Tracts" to all of her classmates and teachers and tries to get them to come to that fundie church with her and her friend, and she seems to think it's some great accomplishment that she and her friend got most of the other girls in their sports teams at school to get baptized all at once (I really, really hope it's a peer pressure thing where a few did it and the rest followed and weren't really serious about it rather than my offspring genuinely turning probably about 50-100 people into fundies). And don't even get me started with the school, they won't do ANYTHING to discourage this behavior because of "free speech" (I would expect this kind of shit out of the deep south, but not New England). But even though I disagree with all of this, I still love my daughter and don't would rather she not go to this place that has absolutely horrible reviews, apparently punishes rape victims, and appears from their website to be filled mostly with homeschoolers and backwoods knuckle draggers from schools in the Bible Belt, and was hoping for some pointers on how to dissuade it. I'm going to try to encourage her to consider Liberty or Cedarville (anyone have any ideas on how to approach someone like her with that?) but otherwise it looks like I'm stuck with accepting this. I guess I should be happy for her that she picked a good profession to pursue, but I just can't get behind this Pensacola place. Thanks for your help. -Sally — Unsigned, by: 2001:67c:2628:647:12::e4 / talk
- Well, since your daughter is so smart, maybe you could encourage her to use her rational thought processes. Does what she believes hold up to rational scrutiny? Don't try arguing with her, just try to set her on a path to self-examination. And, she has 140 IQ but wants to go into nursing?! Unless she wants to get a PhD in nursing, she'd be wasting her potential, and getting a fundie degree in nursing would make it difficult to get a doctorate in healthcare or science. Bongolian (talk) 21:34, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
I know, right? I'm almost certain she could get into Harvard or Yale and study medicine because she has a 4.0 GPA, but for whatever reason she's stuck on wanting to go to a fundie school. She's not overly open with me but I think it has to do with her being a girl and her thinking that nursing is a "girly" profession. She's said she wants to marry a missionary and go overseas to help people in developing countries, something like Doctors Without Borders from the sounds of it. All of this just makes me want to smoke a joint and have a couple of cocktails. (Also, how do I sign my posts the right way?) -Sally— Unsigned, by: 2001:67C:2628:647:12:0:0:E4 / talk / contribs
- Like this: On talk pages, please sign your comments using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking on the sign button:
on the toolbar above the edit panel. You can also indent successive talk page comments using one more colon (:) for each line. Thank you. Christopher (talk) 22:00, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
Thoughts on the latest capitol “attack”[edit]
Im surprised this event has been mentioned at least once here and maybe it doesn’t deserve too much attention given that fox news and other conservative outlets have already tried to blow it out of proportion and tried to assert more liberal bias since its been about 5 days but does have anyone have any thoughts on the Noah green incident and discovery about his social media account being linked to Farrakhan in the NOI. The NOI have also released a statement earlier today essentially scrubbing their hands of him and disowning him. SensaurC-137 (talk) 23:12, 7 April 2021 (UTC) https://www.noi.org/nation-of-islam-statement-capitol-assault/SensaurC-137 (talk) 23:17, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- What capitol attack? There was another one?! MarioSuperstar77 (talk) 23:40, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- MarioSuperstar: Yes, someone named Noah Green attempted to crash through the barricade surrounding the Capitol before attacking two officers with a knife several days ago.
- As far as the NOI stuff goes, newsflash: terrorists have multiple ideologies, particularly troubled "lone assholes". (The term too often used in the media, "lone wolf" is, frankly, an insult to wolves.) Motives can come from anything. This is actually the first violent incident, at least in a while, I can think of (Google seems to confirm) tied Louis Farrakhan or the Nation of Islam. (At least I can't find anything since Farrakhan's role in Malcolm X's death and the 1972 Harlem mosque incident, or if you count splinter groups, the 1977 Hanafi Siege). Farrakhan's known for being a ruthless anti-Semite / bigot of course, but not really known for being a violent shithead these days. Farrakhan is an End Times/Revelation type and it seems like this is what Green's posts tended to reference. The Economist recently did a few blurbs on how brain injuries and criminals are correlated and in light of this it's also interesting to hear Green's family note to the media that they noticed mental issues with Green from head injuries sustained when Green was playing American football. PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 23:48, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- This is fairly common. There was a Frontline episode on on traumatic brain injuries and CTE caused by American Football, and one of the subjects was a college player who went on a crime spree due to his impaired judgement. Artificius (talk) 17:13, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
- For all we know, CTE or head trauma might explain part of one of two mass shootings that took place today in America. (Meaning the ex-NFL player mass shooting, not the Texas cabinet manufacturer mass shooting. I know, getting hard to keep all the stories straight.) PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 23:09, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
- This is fairly common. There was a Frontline episode on on traumatic brain injuries and CTE caused by American Football, and one of the subjects was a college player who went on a crime spree due to his impaired judgement. Artificius (talk) 17:13, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
I watched Godzilla vs. Kong yesterday[edit]
I say this in the best possible way: Godzilla vs. Kong feels like it was written by a child off his ADHD medication. Like, everything that's not monster related feels completely perfunctory. Like the movie itself doesn't even care about those bits, which I like because human characters are never worth a damn in monster movies. It knows that we're there to watch Godzilla and Kong fight and goddamn is it committed to giving us as much of those two punching each other. The last 40 minutes or so reminded me of me playing with action figures when I was like 10 years old and I mean this in the best possible way.
Overall, really enjoyed this movie. Would recommend. Uncle Mark (talk) 15:38, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- Sounds a lot like the original, although hopefully the Big Two aren't obviously two wrestlers in crap monster suits. But is there a scene where a giant octopus randomly attacks a village? Avida Dollarsher again 18:30, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- As someone with Adhd, I... Would think twice before doing that comparison of ADHD. Anyhow it's a common problem of monster movies to spend a long time building up and having no monsters and it's good knowing that the movie doesn't fall into that trap. --It's-a me,
🎄LeftyGreenMario!🎄 23:19, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- I watched it on Sunday, and honestly I have no idea what even happened. Which is almost correct? Not a spoiler, the first thing Kong is about is a little tiny innocent girl who only speaks in sign language, like, is she literally the only person on skull island, whoops, that doesn't matter because she's off on a military mission with a lady who literally speaks the same sign language. I watched it small screen, but I will say, the CGI rendering every hair on Kong and every, uncomfortably textured scale on Godzilla was like, uncanny valley gross. I didn't like looking at them. It was all nonsense and gross visuals and yeah fun fights, but the human storyline, which I fully called stupid for the first movie and really enjoyed getting blown off in the second, was so fucking disjointed and pointless and poorly edited, like, specific humans are running away from monster fights and then they are inside magical ships in the next frame. Like, nothing violated my suspension of disbelief, but I can't explain a single thing that happened in the movie. I give it a 0, for the express reason that there had to have been so much effort and money poured into the CGI, but that's literally what ruins everything that matters in this hack editing fest, it doesn't matter if there's a director's cut, just like the Sonic pitch that people rightfully said "nah" to, I mean, these models are really uncomfortable to look at. And that is the final product, just uncomfortable CGI models and hack editing. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 04:58, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
- Boo! test - this thing seems to have settled on an output. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 03:54, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- SO, it's not uniquely randomly generated each reload and it's also not in direct response the post above it, but clowns on all characters within the topic. Pretty good. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 03:56, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- "Anonymous User" (inappropriate name), perhaps Obama thinks the soldiers drove the humvees to Iraq!!! I reread the beginning of your rant at the top of this section and I doubt you've taken half the statistics courses that I have, so it's painfully obvious that you're easily taken in by Hollywood Values. I urge you, I beseech you, I beg you: accept that capitalizing Hell deters crime. Do yourself a favor and admit that the public school mindset of morality is what you want it to be, and trespassing against others is OK if you want it to be. Work with the lights on creates more wealth and alleviates more hardship than laziness with the lights off does. Read your bible and pray!--Andy Schlafly 14:09, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- I watched it on Sunday, and honestly I have no idea what even happened. Which is almost correct? Not a spoiler, the first thing Kong is about is a little tiny innocent girl who only speaks in sign language, like, is she literally the only person on skull island, whoops, that doesn't matter because she's off on a military mission with a lady who literally speaks the same sign language. I watched it small screen, but I will say, the CGI rendering every hair on Kong and every, uncomfortably textured scale on Godzilla was like, uncanny valley gross. I didn't like looking at them. It was all nonsense and gross visuals and yeah fun fights, but the human storyline, which I fully called stupid for the first movie and really enjoyed getting blown off in the second, was so fucking disjointed and pointless and poorly edited, like, specific humans are running away from monster fights and then they are inside magical ships in the next frame. Like, nothing violated my suspension of disbelief, but I can't explain a single thing that happened in the movie. I give it a 0, for the express reason that there had to have been so much effort and money poured into the CGI, but that's literally what ruins everything that matters in this hack editing fest, it doesn't matter if there's a director's cut, just like the Sonic pitch that people rightfully said "nah" to, I mean, these models are really uncomfortable to look at. And that is the final product, just uncomfortable CGI models and hack editing. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 04:58, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
- As someone with Adhd, I... Would think twice before doing that comparison of ADHD. Anyhow it's a common problem of monster movies to spend a long time building up and having no monsters and it's good knowing that the movie doesn't fall into that trap. --It's-a me,
- It's so weird that king kong gets roped into kaiju stuff given that he's really just a big ape that acts like a big ape, and the story actually centers on the pride of man, and his cruelty to what he cannot control. "'twas beauty that killed the beast... Actually, wait, no, it was mothra" ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 14:16, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
- A Schlafly quote generator. If it were possible, and I believe it is possible because I've always been a fan of automated text responses, I shudder to think it's all Chopra and Schlafly. Why not get a little Crowder and Carlson in there while you're at it, you maniacs.
| spoiler |
|---|
|
No psychic 3rd head old school Cruisin USA rig needed, do you really think you can control Schlafly? Gol Sarnitt (talk) 03:46, 9 April 2021 (UTC) |
- Signing just to prove I have red blood that bleeds, and also to see the new AI Schlafly response. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 03:48, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
I really enjoyed it. If you like the idea of seeing two unreal but super-famous movie monsters having at each other then this film is for you. But if that is not your specific demographic then don't bother.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 15:46, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
More random internet tidbits[edit]
After that stupidity of that one catholic blog, I remembered an even worse one, ran by an Electric Universe idiot (Whom i had an argument with a year ago; i tried to get them to explain how lightbulbs and nuclear weapons/power worked, also asking him to explain the actual products of the Electron/Positron annihilation, and he went totally silent.
http://alternativephysics.org/
The "theories" on this website are particularly stupid; especially with him believing there is no speed of light limit. Probably worth a look. — Unsigned, by: Xnopyt / talk / contribs
AI doomsday alarmism as something remarkably cult-like[edit]
"You can build crystal palaces of thought, working from first principles, then climb up inside them and pull the ladder up behind you." Cult-like mentalities can form surrounding many things, and on the more intellectual side, here's an article (really text and images for a 2016 talk) arguing against the AI doomsday thinking variety, and humorously pointing out the cult-like features:
Superintelligence: The Idea That Eats Smart People
Interesting, because it argues against both the reasonableness of the "inside view" and points out the "outside view" of how it looks to a more distanced observer. It touches on how otherwise, you are left with those convinced by the specific content on the inside using it to argue against all those who dismiss it based on the form and context visible on the outside. It's also a nice look at more general themes, and I found it interesting for more generally thinking about cult-like mentalities. --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 09:34, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
- The thing about super-intelligence is you only have to have been reasonably smarter than a dumb powerful person who stymies you completely one time to understand why it's not an inherent threat to humanity. Every "smart kid" who's gone through high school knows that feeling. And one only need look at the state of the world to see that power doesn't necessarily flow into the hands of the competent. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 14:25, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
- Artificial intelligence first needs to show some signs of actual intelligence for any sort of AI doomsday scenario to work. At present, AI is glorified pattern matching. Any sort of doomsday scenario that involves artificial intelligence would far more likely involve humans misusing AI routines, by engaging in the sort of cultish futurism so endemic to Silicon Valley, and thinking that the algorithm can do no wrong (see: Boeing 737 Max).
- Hey, this is one of my areas! Yeah, I'd probably calm down with the AI doomsdayism if I were them. What we have now are more like clever non-deterministic statistical algorithms than something with actual intelligence. We would first have to know more about how actual intelligence actually works before we have any hope of creating any real AI ourselves. Gangster Computer God (talk) 14:38, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
- Yes. This. If we don't understand how human consciousness is produced and we lack a good universal description of intelligence it's pretty clear that we are not going to duplicating these things artificially in the near future.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 14:47, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
- Honestly even if a super intelligent ai was created, it would still be fighting a seriously uphill battle to take over systems protected with modern encryption. Computers running advanced algorithms are already trying to hack every computer available in the world, and failing. MirrorIrorriM (talk) 02:49, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- I mean, I don't get the idea that the pushback is cult-like, but I do get that there is a parallel to the Luddite movement, I'm not saying it is not a thing. My concern is that AI is going to be used to poe suckers for money by the people who can afford to run the servers and don't care what the outcome is. Beautifully puts anti-tech grifters out of jobs, and yet... leaves something to be desired for the rest of us. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 04:45, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- I thought it might change, so I snagged a copy of the sclafely bot a little confused with my omission of a prepositional phrase. Unless that's the Schlafly joke, in which case, the poe's law concern is worth some weight.
- Honestly even if a super intelligent ai was created, it would still be fighting a seriously uphill battle to take over systems protected with modern encryption. Computers running advanced algorithms are already trying to hack every computer available in the world, and failing. MirrorIrorriM (talk) 02:49, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- Yes. This. If we don't understand how human consciousness is produced and we lack a good universal description of intelligence it's pretty clear that we are not going to duplicating these things artificially in the near future.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 14:47, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
- Hey, this is one of my areas! Yeah, I'd probably calm down with the AI doomsdayism if I were them. What we have now are more like clever non-deterministic statistical algorithms than something with actual intelligence. We would first have to know more about how actual intelligence actually works before we have any hope of creating any real AI ourselves. Gangster Computer God (talk) 14:38, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
- Artificial intelligence first needs to show some signs of actual intelligence for any sort of AI doomsday scenario to work. At present, AI is glorified pattern matching. Any sort of doomsday scenario that involves artificial intelligence would far more likely involve humans misusing AI routines, by engaging in the sort of cultish futurism so endemic to Silicon Valley, and thinking that the algorithm can do no wrong (see: Boeing 737 Max
SO, it's not uniquely randomly generated each reload and it's also not in direct response the post above it, but clowns on all characters within the topic. Pretty good. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 03:56, 10 April 2021 (UTC) "Gol Sarnitt", sarcasm doesn't working well in encyclopedias. I reread the beginning of your rant at the top of this section and I did reflect on how your 'experts' perceive American conservatives, and I've concluded they are clueless, so clearly you're a victim of Professor values. You also clearly deny that women knowing their place helps resist moral relativism. It's simple logic: I do know quite a bit about the Irish press, Ireland, and Wikipedia. In fact, I've been quoted in the past in the Irish newspapers. Perhaps logic doesn't matter much to some, and perhaps deception doesn't bother them. But on this site logic and truthfulness carry the day. I urge you to open your mind and set it free. You'll be amazed by how much better your life becomes as a result.--aschlafly 03:56, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- Like, it's funny, unless you don't know? I'm not saying don't do it, I think it's really cool and impressive, but I'm saying be careful with it, I have seen a couple cases where there wasn't anything especially absurd. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 04:55, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
Richard Dawkins vs Deepak Chopra[edit]
Dawkins debated Chopra in 2014 for... some reason. God... Dawkins must have been bored out of his mind to even accept debating this living word salad bar. Aaronmichael5 18:22, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
- Weird factoid: Richard Dawkins' name is also an anagram for the words "Rah! Darwin's dick!" Roman Sionis tends to be inactive during summer 21:07, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
- Weirder factoid: Richard Dawens' middle name is "!'!" - : jokes, I'm sorry I'm playing Sclafely bot - "" so distracted Gol Sarnitt (talk) 05:39, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
New conspiracy theory[edit]
So, DMX and Prince Philip both died today. This lends itself to the perfect conspiracy theory; Prince Philip was just DMX in whiteface (or maybe, Philip in blackface?). Think about it, neither one of them really understands "paying taxes", they've never been photographed in the same room together, the prince is Earl of Wessex and DMX's birth name is Earl... CorSock (talk) 20:22, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
- The Jesuits were definitely behind this. They did it because they wanted to fool us all for some reason. WAKE UP SHEEPLE!!! Aaronmichael5 22:04, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
- Fuck tryin to get it on your own, X gonna deliver to the angels now. Knock knock open up. I honestly thought DMX died a couple days ago. Maybe I just heard he was in the hospital and assumed the worst. Dude was a big player in mainstreaming confessional rap. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 06:37, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- I'm pretty sure that two famous people died in the UK. One was Price Philip and the other was some hard-working saint-like selfless magnanimous humanitarian. They seemed to be talking about that second guy a LOT on the UK news.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 08:06, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- Fuck tryin to get it on your own, X gonna deliver to the angels now. Knock knock open up. I honestly thought DMX died a couple days ago. Maybe I just heard he was in the hospital and assumed the worst. Dude was a big player in mainstreaming confessional rap. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 06:37, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
I will probably get a stroke soon.[edit]
It's just been super stressful, so I haven't been posting here in a while. I promise that I will be back.— Jeh2ow Damn son! 00:34, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- Rest up. For me, the absolute indignity of this site is I always want to spend time away. But I do want to see what everyone has to say, especially when I've said something I immediately regret. I hope you find some reinvigorating distractions. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 05:51, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
I'm off to get injected with Autism![edit]
So, I'm getting my vaccine today. I'm hoping the shots make me really good at solving Rubiks Cubes, or get the appeal of those fidget spinners. Anyone else get any Autistic Superpowers from their vaccines? CorSock (talk) 19:36, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
- Still waiting for my microchip from Bill Gates. Typical Microsoft late delivery.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 20:03, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
- Next week I get the Mark of the Beast. Hail Satan. --Possible KGB Spy (Eyes Shift) (talk) 20:40, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
- What is incredibly retarded and inane about these Mark of the Beast arguments is that isn't the whole point of getting the mark deliberate? You can't 'accidentally' get it. In other words, it's not like you can get it innocently only to find out later you gave your soul away. But fundies can't seem to make up their minds on that. Aaronmichael5 21:25, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
- What always surprises me is how these types obsess over things only mentioned briefly in the Bible (rapture, imprecatory prayer, mark of the beast) and blow them out of proportion, but dismiss the word of Jesus himself in Matthew 24:36. You can't know you're in the End Times until Jesus himself comes down and tells you personally. It's funny that those who love painting anyone who disagrees with them as "fake Christians" willfully commit blasphemy...IveBeenFrank (talk) 23:08, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
- I get mine tomorrow, my state finally opened up (on vaccine availabilty, we've been going whole hog on no capacity limits or masks). I wasn't gonna cut in line. I figure the rapture can't take everybody so I'm just doing my part to stay behind and care about my elders and community when Jesus comes back and takes the real OG's to heaven, like He was saying He would do during the apostles' lifetimes. Am I supposed to capitalize Apostles too? I did it both ways, maybe I'm OK. Am I supposed to capitalize Rapture!?! Gol Sarnitt (talk) 04:10, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
- That is pretty worrying. You wouldn't want to go to Hell (or hell) for getting the capitalization wrong!Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 13:14, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
- A snarky, not entirely incorrect summary of the American style "Rapture" is that it exists only because, one day, John Nelson Darby fell off a horse. The Biblical support for the rapture is mainly just one letter to Paul (1 Thessalonians 4). I tend to see the modern evangelical Rapture motif as declarations that one is holier-than-thou. There are far more verses in the Bible cautioning against being holier than thou (Luke 18 and Luke 6, for a start) but somehow these parts of the Bible are missed. PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 15:36, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
- A snarky, not entirely incorrect summary of the American style "Rapture" is that it exists only because, one day, John Nelson Darby
- That is pretty worrying. You wouldn't want to go to Hell (or hell) for getting the capitalization wrong!Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 13:14, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
- I get mine tomorrow, my state finally opened up (on vaccine availabilty, we've been going whole hog on no capacity limits or masks). I wasn't gonna cut in line. I figure the rapture can't take everybody so I'm just doing my part to stay behind and care about my elders and community when Jesus comes back and takes the real OG's to heaven, like He was saying He would do during the apostles' lifetimes. Am I supposed to capitalize Apostles too? I did it both ways, maybe I'm OK. Am I supposed to capitalize Rapture!?! Gol Sarnitt (talk) 04:10, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
- What always surprises me is how these types obsess over things only mentioned briefly in the Bible (rapture, imprecatory prayer, mark of the beast) and blow them out of proportion, but dismiss the word of Jesus himself in Matthew 24:36. You can't know you're in the End Times until Jesus himself comes down and tells you personally. It's funny that those who love painting anyone who disagrees with them as "fake Christians" willfully commit blasphemy...IveBeenFrank (talk) 23:08, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
- What is incredibly retarded and inane about these Mark of the Beast arguments is that isn't the whole point of getting the mark deliberate? You can't 'accidentally' get it. In other words, it's not like you can get it innocently only to find out later you gave your soul away. But fundies can't seem to make up their minds on that. Aaronmichael5 21:25, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
- Next week I get the Mark of the Beast. Hail Satan. --Possible KGB Spy (Eyes Shift) (talk) 20:40, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
- Update. It feel like someone punched my arm the other day, and I'm still sore. Still better than covid. CorruptUser 04:39, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- Mine is crazy sore too. I got Moderna.Gol Sarnitt (talk) 05:08, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- Huh, both times my arm never felt worse than a standard tetanus shot (noticeable, but nothing significant). Hope it fades fast, you'll definitely feel a sense of liberation once it's gone and you're at the 2 week threshold. (And if anyone does become autistic because of the shots, I'd love to hear how your new diagnosis changed your life!) The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 05:15, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- I was actually literally going to edit to reference my last tetanus shot. Similar, I wouldn't want to get called out as a wimp, but like, this hurts worse, is it OK to say it's actually crazy sore? Worse when I was throwin shit around at work like if a cramp was starting but nothing I could stretch out, better now, but still sore. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 05:27, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- Wow. I appear to have been lucky when it came to Vaccine side effects-I had my first shot last Monday and didn't feel too bad. I drank a lot of water before the shot. Maybe that helps? I don't know, but if this advice helps somebody...-Flandres (talk) 18:14, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- The first shot was essentially nothing for me too, it was the second one (I got the Moderna shot very early on) that got me. Still managed to push through a full day of work, but that was an experience I'd only willingly have if the alternative was a potentially fatal disease. I hope your second shot goes better, apparently it's harder on younger people. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 02:05, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
- Wow. I appear to have been lucky when it came to Vaccine side effects-I had my first shot last Monday and didn't feel too bad. I drank a lot of water before the shot. Maybe that helps? I don't know, but if this advice helps somebody...-Flandres (talk) 18:14, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- Mine is crazy sore too. I got Moderna.Gol Sarnitt (talk) 05:08, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
Where does the labor movement go from here?[edit]
Despite considerable national attention and support from politicians across the political spectrum, Amazon workers in Bessemer seem to have overwhelmingly decided against unionizing. I've seen a lot of news articles describing the vote as "a bellwether for labor" and whatnot, so now that the vote has overwhelmingly failed, what's next for organized labor? TheEndlessVoid (talk) 21:48, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
- Many in the labor movement have already considered the loss to have a silver lining. The massive push, and media attention means that some people will be more willing to give it a shot, and regardless, the labor movement has had worse losses.PhoxyDude (talk) 00:56, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- I think that Keir Starmer is doing as well as could be expected. We will have to see what happens after the end of lock-down.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 13:34, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Bob M I think they mean pro-union sentiment in the US. As for that, same plan as always, try try again. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 13:52, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- Wow. Really? People actually write as though the US is the only country in the world?Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 14:48, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Bob M Well there was recently an attempt to Unionize an Amazon warehouse in the southern US so... ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 14:52, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- Wow. Really? People actually write as though the US is the only country in the world?Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 14:48, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Bob M I think they mean pro-union sentiment in the US. As for that, same plan as always, try try again. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 13:52, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- I think that Keir Starmer is doing as well as could be expected. We will have to see what happens after the end of lock-down.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 13:34, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
Why does MAGA hate Bill Gates[edit]
Apparently, Bill Gates is a "leftist" and "globalist" there (at CP, which I use as an indicator of the Trump flock's attitude). But what exactly has he done to rile them off? He goes around doing general philanthropy and trying to find solutions to issues like climate change, vaccination programs, etc. but he does try to stay strenuously neutral and hasn't really attacked Trump or anything, so why exactly do they hate him? This might sound stupid, but I'm just curious. MeowPurr 13:25, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- It's like Tom Hanks with Qanon. He's a prominent, well-known, and evidently powerful figure who hasn't come out with tremendous support for them and their ideology, so he's automatically their enemy. As for his prominence in their lore, I think it came about quite by accident: people kept making conspiracies about well-known world figures, and for whatever reason, ones about Bill Gates stuck. As a result, they became co-opted into the nexus of Trumpism and Gates himself was declared an Enemy of the State, and worked into an unimaginable number of Illuminati/deep-state style conspiracies. IveBeenFrank (talk) 13:56, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- Anti-vaxx / NWO paranoia has been a persistent strain of thought in the right-wing looniverse since at least the Birchers. Gates' support of vaccine programmes & work with global health organisations makes him suspect in such people's eyes, and then there's the fact he was warning of the dangers of a global pandemic long before the 'rona hit, which has left plenty of video and speeches to be sliced & diced in support of the conspiratorial guff du jour. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 15:27, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- Here's a thing about conservatives: they feel every bit of the same crushing destruction of human potential that our society inflicts on everyone, and any idiot can see who's unfairly winning in our society. However, decades of intellectual poison have rendered them only able to blame liberals/communists/atheists for problems that they vote to continue over and over and over. So they find a way to make "big corporations" into somehow a liberal thing, because Bill Gates has neoliberal views, or make up the utterly batshit concept of "corporate communism" to explain why Amazon takes down right wing hell sites like parler that do things like allow advocating major crimes like assassination or terrorism without moderation. The inability to blame the system working as intended for problems it creates is an amazing victory for the right wing media empire. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 16:30, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
Just realized that 40% of RW moderation is Christian now[edit]
Not bad for such an evil atheist site, huh? GeeJayK (talk) 22:05, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- 2/6 is 33%, not 40. That’s still about double the Christian demographic of the wiki as a whole, if the 2017 survey is at all representative. Christopher (talk) 22:23, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- Oh, wait, I thought we had 5 mods, not 6. GeeJayK (talk) 22:27, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- Who are these barbarous Christians in the mod family? Send them to the lions. ALL OF THEM!!!! ShabiDOO 22:36, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- Wow, Ken was right, we are desecularizing! Checkmate, atheists! Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 00:58, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- Gentlemen, I hate to do it, but on the behalf of all christendom I declare VICTORY! Olé! Olé! Olé! Rockford the Roe boop my snootpraise Oscar Wilde 16:32, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
- Ken is a raving lunatic. If he's right about anything, it's surely a coincidence. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 03:51, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- Well, I think RationalWiki is much less left-leaning than Conservapedia is right-leaning. So they're really not as polar opposite as people may think. Aaronmichael5 23:44, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- Funnily enough, I actually find RW to be a good deal more neutral than Wikipedia's politics sections. SPOV and and a decent degree of humour bring it closer to the center than Wikipedia, whose politics articles are currently mired in edit wars and negativity inserted all over the politics section. MeowPurr 05:16, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
- Well, I think RationalWiki is much less left-leaning than Conservapedia is right-leaning. So they're really not as polar opposite as people may think. Aaronmichael5 23:44, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- Gentlemen, I hate to do it, but on the behalf of all christendom I declare VICTORY! Olé! Olé! Olé!
- Wow, Ken was right, we are desecularizing! Checkmate, atheists!
- Who are these barbarous Christians in the mod family? Send them to the lions. ALL OF THEM!!!! ShabiDOO 22:36, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- Oh, wait, I thought we had 5 mods, not 6. GeeJayK (talk) 22:27, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- Once upon a time I promised to infiltrate the mod team with like-minded Christians and turn RW into Conservapedia 2.0. Everything is proceeding as I have foreseen. --RWRW (talk) 07:45, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
In-fighting[edit]
Chris and Mario won't stop fighting each other because they have the mentality of a pair of 7 years old during playtime. This is neither productive or useful in the slightest, it would be best to give them both an interation ban imo (I would use the Mod noticeboard to comment if I had an account). 2A02:120B:C3FB:3B40:F59D:4FAA:510E:4F1D (talk) 12:11, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- You were the one to suggest a chicken coop against me and GC, so now that you have your chance to be heard you just try to get people to actually start it, what's your problem with leftists on-site? MarioSuperstar77 (talk) 12:13, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- I have to agree there. This whole leftist-centrist feud is the reason I'm not around as often anymore. --Goatspeed. Happy Holidays!🎄CircularR
asoning🎄Prototype lab 18:05, 11 April 2021 (UTC) - Again, I can't help but note this IP is from the French parts of Switzerland. (That's GR for those who don't get the reference.)-Flandres (talk) 18:11, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- Well, GR is Swiss/Austrian. (I asked him) So I don‘t think it‘s him. Kevs Ping! 19:06, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- Of course you did --Goatspeed. Happy Holidays!🎄CircularRasoning🎄Prototype lab 19:07, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- The identity of the BoN doesn't really matter honestly, only the content of their comments. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 19:16, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- Yes. Exactly.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 11:41, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
- The identity of the BoN doesn't really matter honestly, only the content of their comments. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 19:16, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- Of course you did --Goatspeed. Happy Holidays!🎄CircularR
- Well, GR is Swiss/Austrian. (I asked him) So I don‘t think it‘s him. Kevs Ping! 19:06, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
Is it immoral...[edit]
...to have a picnic with some friend on top of a strangers grave? Let's say the stranger's next of kin are still alive and visit once a year (though not the day of the picnic). ShabiDOO 16:52, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- Immoral, no. Insensitive, probably. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 17:09, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- Would the graveyard people even allow it? Gangster Computer God (talk) 17:12, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- Europe has a lot of old graveyards (and even running ones) that aren't very well attended. You can even walk through grave yards in some towns as a short-cut. So I can imagine the police being called to some graveyards before staff ever noticed (if they were even working at all). ShabiDOO 03:24, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- (EC)Why would you though? There is nothing satisfying about that. If you were doing it on the grave of an enemy or something, now that is something I would understand. But...why are you having a picnic over the corpse of some random dude? (Also, Marquee makes a good point)-Flandres (talk) 17:17, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- How would you feel if random strangers had a picnic on the grave of your own next of kin? If you would not be okay with that, then it is probably wrong for you to do it. If you would be fine with it, then you're probably not doing anything wrong (although I wouldn't be surprised if the graveyard people disallowed it). Serene (talk) 17:24, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- That's an interesting moral theory. I suppose for the most part it works but there can be some serious problems with it. A minor example would be say...a smoker not minding if someone else smokes in a room. Yet, it could be argued it's rather immoral for that person to smoke, on a sunny day, in a small non-ventilated room full of children when they could easily go outside and smoke. A more serious example would be a masochist who wouldn't mind being tortured. I still think in most cases it wouldn't be moral for them to torture a random stranger. To be honest I don't think I'd care if anyone had a picnic on my grave. My family might. But I'd be in eternal-oblivion. So I couldn't care even if I wanted to. ShabiDOO 03:29, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- I am not sure it would be "immoral". What moral code would be being broken? It would certainly be potentially provocative, somewhat insensitive and a little weird though. I wouldn't do it.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 19:20, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- Yeah Bob. It totally depends on the moral system. I would imagine in Virtue ethics it would be considered immoral for the most part. Pointlessly having a picnic on a grave knowing it could hurt or disrupt people when there are numerous other places you could do it would not be a shining example of virtuous behaviour. For a deontological system, the only rule I could imagine the rule would be: not engaging in unnecessary hurtful behaviour when it is easily avoided. That of course is an extremely murky, grey and very relative law...which deontological systems try to avoid. With such a vague law...you could say you shouldn't "draw cartoons of Mohammed". I can envision many constructive reasons for doing that (as dubious as many would sound...not the least criticising bad ideas and asserting your freedom of expression when ideological forces try to silence it). But...I gasp at any such law that would challenge drawing cartoons. And yet I still think pointlessly having a picnic on a loved-person's grave can simply have no reasonable positive justifications. So...forget deontological. Utilitarian...would depend very much on the system. In its simplest, I'd say the good of respecting property rights (owner of the grave) and the dignity of the bereaving family outweighs any imaginable value of picnicking on the grave when there are countless other places to do it. I could go on. 03:38, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- From a religious perspective, then yes, it would be immoral. :P Roman Sionis tends to be inactive during summer 19:47, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- St Martin-in-the-Fields in London actively encourages dining on top of the gravestones.[11] And what would a London attraction be without an instrument of torture.[12] Bongolian (talk) 03:40, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- Indeed Ironman. But one problem with religious perspectives is that the religious moral rule could be so encompassing it would be incompatible with reason. For example...some indigenous cultures consider large land masses as sacred religious ground. This would mean having a picnic anywhere over dozens to even hundreds of square kilometers would be immoral. I also don't really take religious morality that seriously as some religions think chopping up children's genitals is moral and rejecting your family's religion is highly immoral so...fuck that. ShabiDOO 03:43, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- But that's the unfortunate rub. A gravesite is supposed to be personal. And a big part of that is going to be religious. So if you have a fun, quiet picnic, and you choose to do it in a graveyard, you're not hurting anybody, but you could spend some time to reflect on the headstones that are granting you that space and tranquility. I'm not saying respect the religion, when I die throw me in the trash, but I'm saying it's a graveyard, it is an inherently and intentionally quiet and reflective spot, not a lucky place where you're surprisingly unbothered. I wouldn't say "don't have a picnic in a graveyard" I would just say "know a lot of peoples' family is buried there in grief and sorrow and this is where they come to respect and remember their lives" and... I dunno, picnic accordingly. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 03:50, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- Indeed Ironman. But one problem with religious perspectives is that the religious moral rule could be so encompassing it would be incompatible with reason. For example...some indigenous cultures consider large land masses as sacred religious ground. This would mean having a picnic anywhere over dozens to even hundreds of square kilometers would be immoral. I also don't really take religious morality that seriously as some religions think chopping up children's genitals is moral and rejecting your family's religion is highly immoral so...fuck that. ShabiDOO 03:43, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- St Martin-in-the-Fields in London actively encourages dining on top of the gravestones.[11] And what would a London attraction be without an instrument of torture.[12] Bongolian (talk) 03:40, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
Gone for a while[edit]
I’ll probably be gone for a while. My dog just died. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 17:27, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, Duce. I know how it feels to lose a dog. Fuck, I can't imagine myself without my dog... GeeJayK (talk) 17:29, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- That's crazy brutal Duce. Very sorry to hear that! Big hugs! ShabiDOO 17:30, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- My condolences. Always sucks to lose a pet. :( --Goatspeed. Happy Holidays!🎄CircularRasoning🎄Prototype lab 18:02, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- My condolences. Always sucks to lose a pet. :( --Goatspeed. Happy Holidays!🎄CircularR
- That's crazy brutal Duce. Very sorry to hear that! Big hugs! ShabiDOO 17:30, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- Sorry to hear that man. Take as much time as you need. Evilatheistheathen (talk) 18:50, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- That hurts. Really sorry to hear it.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 19:06, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- Take your time, losing a pet can be hard. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 19:11, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- RIP dog. Aaronmichael5 03:02, 11 Mach 2021 (UTC)
- Sad to hear that. RIP dog, in all sincerity. MeowPurr 05:18, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
- I would gamble the world is worse for the loss, mourning family is tough. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 06:25, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- My condolences, Duce. I don't really empathize with people, but I can only imagine what losing a dog is like. Roman Sionis tends to be inactive during summer 14:37, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- I would gamble the world is worse for the loss, mourning family is tough. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 06:25, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- Sad to hear that. RIP dog, in all sincerity. MeowPurr 05:18, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
- RIP dog. Aaronmichael5 03:02, 11 Mach 2021 (UTC)
- Take your time, losing a pet can be hard. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 19:11, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- That hurts. Really sorry to hear it.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 19:06, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
Interesting story[edit]
Yesterday I came across this story, from the plaintiff in some big gender clinic lawsuit in the UK. I don't know anything like enough to extrapolate anything from it, but it was an interesting read. Whatever else happens, I hope Bell herself is able to move on from this and live a happy life. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 21:34, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
- Why does Steven Pinker show up on the editorial board of every single one of these "actually we're centrist, but have a pile of right wing propaganda in liberal branding" sites? It's like herpes, always there, not always visible. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 16:21, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
- I mean, he's an interesting guy and all (I read The Better Angels of our Nature, it gets cited enough that it's helpful to know what it actually says), but he does seem to show up in places I'd never expect. No comment on the nature of Persuasion, don't really know enough about it; I've only read this one article from them. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 01:50, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- I check the editorial board of news/opinion publications when I first come across them. Most places its innocuous regular people making a living doing news and presumably the hard work of editing. But there's a certain flavor of site that brands itself as intellectual and worldly that seems to consistently get the same incestuous batch of hucksters again and again. And the tone is, again and again, trying to pitch some feverishly right wing things as sound liberalism. It's not just Pinker; he's just my most hated. In this case its also David French, Hadely Freeman, and Jonathan Haidt: serial propagandists of exactly the same sort. But it's always a grab bag of the same shitheads. I hesitate to toss Francis Fukuyama in my list, because while he's often part of these same boards, his publication history isn't as polluted with the right wing shilling.
- Knowing you, and I apologize for this broad assumption, you think each of those people is a respectable writer, but they all have a long history of exactly the sort of duplicitous bullshit I mean. I can't stand that there seem to be institutional forces at work to give these scumbags repeated platforms. They come out of nowhere with huge(for media) payrolls, and it's always the 4-5 of the same dozen names. Always. The world has so many more educated, eloquent people out there. Maybe I've descended into literal paranoid delusion, but I sincerely think there's something markedly wrong, and purposefully manipulative here. I'm not attacking the messenger because I don't want to address the message. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 03:34, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- No worries. I've always had sort of a YMMV attitude towards the names you mentioned above, since not everything they say is totally wrong (e.g. if it helps someone to hear from Haidt that life isn't a battle between good and evil, or have French explain some of the gross constitutional violations of the previous administration, whatever works), but I generally try to take it with a helping of salt. Pinker is actually a pretty accomplished linguist (I also read The Language Instinct), so I can at least see where he got some kind of platform, but the others do seem to be punching way above their weight. I found this particular article after having seen a few miscellaneous news items about the court case, figured the person who was the subject of it might have some insight. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 14:04, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- I mean, he's an interesting guy and all (I read The Better Angels of our Nature, it gets cited enough that it's helpful to know what it actually says), but he does seem to show up in places I'd never expect. No comment on the nature of Persuasion, don't really know enough about it; I've only read this one article from them. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 01:50, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
I Smell a Horseshoe[edit]
Both Glenn Greenwald and Steve Bannon are angry at a website called "Bellingcat", which has showcased several war crimes in Syria and other countries. Therefore, they must be doing something right. Even more concerning is the fact that Greenwald is both Jewish and openly gay, while Bannon has repeatedly promoted white nationalist and homophobic talking points. Strange bedfellows indeed.— Jeh2ow Damn son! 15:47, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- Bellingcat is an investigative journalism site that I at least have great respect for since they're one of the biggest reasons that we managed to figure out the exact individuals responsible for shooting down Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 (MH17). Techpriest (I am Alpharius! /
/ 
/ 
) 15:53, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- I don't really see how this is evidence for "horseshoe theory", Since Greenwald is by all the accounts I've seen center-left/Left-of-center. So you're comparing someone who is at most a social democrat with someone who's a neo-nazi. Hardly stellar evidence for "horseshoe theory"... ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 19:00, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- I'm not sure about Greenwald. But his husband is from a far-left party here in Brazil. So must of us end up assuming he's also far-left. GeeJayK (talk) 19:05, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- @GeeJayK While I can see how one would infer such, I'd like to point out that people in a romantic and/or sexual relationship don't necessarily share all of each others' views. While similar or identical views can help strengthen the relationship, this is not always guaranteed. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 19:14, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- Yeah. That was my point actually. GeeJayK (talk) 19:32, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- I've always thought of Greenwald as left-libertarian personally. What might be less obvious is that Greenwald, from my viewpoint (in a similar manner to Wikileaks) has been slowly drifting towards "userful Putin idiot" lately. That Steve Bannon kisses Putin's ass is perhaps more obvious, of course. I mean, Bellingcat's a British organization, so why the fuck would Greenwald call it not only a "propaganda arm of the CIA & State Dept" but also complain about "hysteria over media outlets associated with the Russian government"? That inference came out of nowhere. It's a shame so many of those that exposed Western propaganda and spying in the early 2000s ended up merely revealing that they weren't complaining about the propaganda and spying after all. In the end, too many actually preferred it if the propaganda and spying were non-Western. PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 19:56, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- Nonetheless, I like to a certain point the the horseshoe theory, but I don't think we can apply it here. Even if Greenwald is actually far-left he can't do the harm that Bannon does (of course the left can be as dangerous as the right, but that's not what's going on nowdays). Putting the mainstream left on the same level as the mainstream right is a mistake that I've done in the past and I don't intend to do again. I hate the Brazilian left and everything about them. But a few looneys aside (yeah, every country has them) they're not on the same level as Bolsonaro and his vassals. I believe that's also truth to the US. GeeJayK (talk) 20:10, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- @GeeJayK I agree with you on everything you said. Every country in the world has idiots, but some idiots are more dangerous than others. I just wanted to point out the hypocrisy of saying that only one country in the world does human rights abuses, and the others can do whatever they want. Now, I'm not defending human rights abuses that we Americans do, that is a serious problem. But trying to handwave other countries for doing the exact same thing, which Greenwald and Bannon both do, is just ridiculous.— Jeh2ow Damn son! 14:03, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Jeh2ow Oh, I don't deny that. I mean, it's not hard realize that during the Cold War the right (or at least those who oppose to communism) were vastly superior to those on the left. You don't even need to compare Reagan, Nixon or LBJ with their Russian counterparts, it's still absurd to put Pinochet on the same level as Castro or the Thammasat University massacre on the same level as the Killing Fields. Now the table has turned? Even though I'd say that Putin and Xi are a lot worse than Trump, Orbán, Bolsonaro and etc, the left is, at least in the democratic World, on average superior to the right, even if there are many idiots and nuts on the left too. GeeJayK (talk) 19:37, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- @GeeJayK I agree with you on everything you said. Every country in the world has idiots, but some idiots are more dangerous than others. I just wanted to point out the hypocrisy of saying that only one country in the world does human rights abuses, and the others can do whatever they want. Now, I'm not defending human rights abuses that we Americans do, that is a serious problem. But trying to handwave other countries for doing the exact same thing, which Greenwald and Bannon both do, is just ridiculous.— Jeh2ow Damn son! 14:03, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- Nonetheless, I like to a certain point the the horseshoe theory, but I don't think we can apply it here. Even if Greenwald is actually far-left he can't do the harm that Bannon does (of course the left can be as dangerous as the right, but that's not what's going on nowdays). Putting the mainstream left on the same level as the mainstream right is a mistake that I've done in the past and I don't intend to do again. I hate the Brazilian left and everything about them. But a few looneys aside (yeah, every country has them) they're not on the same level as Bolsonaro and his vassals. I believe that's also truth to the US. GeeJayK (talk) 20:10, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- I've always thought of Greenwald as left-libertarian personally. What might be less obvious is that Greenwald, from my viewpoint (in a similar manner to Wikileaks) has been slowly drifting towards "userful Putin idiot" lately. That Steve Bannon kisses Putin's ass is perhaps more obvious, of course. I mean, Bellingcat's a British organization, so why the fuck would Greenwald call it not only a "propaganda arm of the CIA & State Dept" but also complain about "hysteria over media outlets associated with the Russian government"? That inference came out of nowhere. It's a shame so many of those that exposed Western propaganda and spying in the early 2000s ended up merely revealing that they weren't complaining about the propaganda and spying after all. In the end, too many actually preferred it if the propaganda and spying were non-Western. PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 19:56, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- Yeah. That was my point actually. GeeJayK (talk) 19:32, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- @GeeJayK While I can see how one would infer such, I'd like to point out that people in a romantic and/or sexual relationship don't necessarily share all of each others' views. While similar or identical views can help strengthen the relationship, this is not always guaranteed. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 19:14, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- I'm not sure about Greenwald. But his husband is from a far-left party here in Brazil. So must of us end up assuming he's also far-left. GeeJayK (talk) 19:05, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- I don't really see how this is evidence for "horseshoe theory", Since Greenwald is by all the accounts I've seen center-left/Left-of-center. So you're comparing someone who is at most a social democrat with someone who's a neo-nazi. Hardly stellar evidence for "horseshoe theory"... ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 19:00, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
MediaWiki 1.35 testing[edit]
I've created a test wiki with RationalWiki's extension set, running MediaWiki 1.35: https://test35.rationalwiki.org/wiki/Main_Page
I've spent a lot of time on this upgrade, but one of the things I've been saying about doing technical work on RationalWiki is that it's a bit lonely. I've spent many days on it with hardly any help or feedback. So I figure, why steal all the fun jobs? I wrote up a testing checklist on the test wiki main page. You can help to test it and fill out the checklist.
It has a separate user table, so if you need a privileged account, create the account and then write something here so I can promote it.
The checklist gives you an idea of the scale of the thing. There's a lot of code in custom extensions which it's probably not feasible to maintain in the long term. Part of the job is deciding what is still used and what we need to keep. Ideally, Wigo3 and VandalBrake would be promoted for use outside RationalWiki in the hope that the future maintenance work will be more widely shared. Maybe some minor features like notitle and iw-nofollow would be integrated into MediaWiki core. -- Tim Starling (talk) 12:39, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- That looks like a serious amount of work.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 13:55, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Tim Starling I’ve created an account, same username (as has Bob M). Already tested a few things but there’s not much you can do when you’re not even autoconfirmed. As I’m a tech here I should probably be a tech there. Christopher (talk) 14:18, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- I gave you and Bob M pretty much all the groups. You should both have full access to Special:Userrights so you should be able to add and remove groups as needed. One nice trick for testing is to use Special:Export with the "Include templates" checkbox selected to export RationalWiki pages to a file, which you can then import them into the test wiki. -- Tim Starling (talk) 22:25, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
YouTube bizarrely recommended a perpetual motion video to me.[edit]
Sorry to foist this trash on you, but obvious video splicing is obvious. The comments imply that the million views this got is from lots of people getting fed this garbage algorithmically. It's unironic; this duplicitous asshole actually wants investors for his free energy machines. I wonder if there's room for a securities fraud complaint. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 16:36, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- I know an a possible, totally legit and v serious source of free energy: find a way to harness the power of men wanking. Just think about it this way: right now, there are hundreds of thousands of men wanking. In fact, I'm wanking right now, myself. Think of all that wasted energy, and imagine a future where we can use that energy for good. Gangster Computer God (talk) 19:50, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- I keep getting recommendations for the Ingraham Angle, which I'm pissed about since my Youtube viewing consists of a strict diet of Daily Wire, various Marvel and DC stuff, memes, and vidya playthroughs, and I wish there was a way to get rid of the recommendations on the top bar of the home menu. Roman Sionis tends to be inactive during summer 20:42, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- Not only is there energy loss during masturbation, there is massive nutritional and energy content within the ejaculate. I personally always drink my own (if my dog doesn't get there first), but it is wasteful that thousands of litres of cum per day are simply wiped up and discarded. Maybe someone could start a business that collects cum and creates nutritious snacks, such as dried-cum crisps, or a mayonnaise substitute. This would be a fantastic way to improve our lives' sustainability. Kauri0.o (talk) 00:20, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- I keep getting recommendations for the Ingraham Angle, which I'm pissed about since my Youtube viewing consists of a strict diet of Daily Wire, various Marvel and DC stuff, memes, and vidya playthroughs, and I wish there was a way to get rid of the recommendations on the top bar of the home menu. Roman Sionis tends to be inactive during summer 20:42, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- Another possible source is exhaled breath from people's nose. If we could somehow mass-produce small wormholes that follow a person's noseholes and teleports all the exhales to a wind turbine, we could terminate coal and fossil fuel extractions full stop. 136.143.215.4 (talk) 19:18, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- Absolutely fantastic idea! I think the biggest hurdle with this is that it's a numbers game. The more people we have breathing, the more energy we can harness. Thus we all have a social responsibility to have as many children as we can, so that we can maximize our contributions to the sustainability of humanity. People, let's fuck like rabbits. Kauri0.o (talk) 21:31, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Another atheist in the world in 9 months[edit]
Since a new Corona wave in my country became foreseeable my girlfriend and I discussed where we were going to spend it because on the last time we didn’t see each other for a month. Since we’re both working from home and it’s close to my parents and hers we decided that she was going to move to my flat. A few days ago she woke me up and told me that she was pregnant. She’s due by the end of the year, who knows our child will be born around Christmas?
We were going to get married last year until the pandemic hit hard. Now we’ll get legally married when things start to get a little better. We’ll still have a Catholic wedding some day because it’s really important to our parents and grandparents even if none of us believe in God. GeeJayK (talk) 14:27, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- Congrats! IveBeenFrank (talk) 14:31, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- Congrats. Actually I had a Catholic wedding. But there was a special format they used when one of the partners (me) wasn't Catholic. We managed to skip the prior marriage counselling by the priest/pervert too. But you might find that more difficult depending on where you are.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 16:01, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks, guys! GeeJayK (talk) 22:05, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- Congratulations! --Goatspeed. Happy Holidays!🎄CircularRasoning🎄Prototype lab 18:35, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks! GeeJayK (talk) 03:09, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- Congratulations GeeJayK! Knight CommanderIn ServiceTo HerGoatness 06:48, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks! GeeJayK (talk) 03:09, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- Congratulations! --Goatspeed. Happy Holidays!🎄CircularR
- Thanks, guys! GeeJayK (talk) 22:05, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- Congrats. Actually I had a Catholic wedding. But there was a special format they used when one of the partners (me) wasn't Catholic. We managed to skip the prior marriage counselling by the priest/pervert too. But you might find that more difficult depending on where you are.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 16:01, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
US troops being withdrawn from Afghanistan, apparently[edit]
Biden has announced a plan to have all US troops withdraw from Afghanistan by the 20th anniversary of 9/11. The only consistent reaction I've seen about this is that it likely won't actually happen. Thoughts? Nebuchadnezzar7658 (talk) 03:25, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- If it does happen, I will admit I was wrong about Biden being a permanently pro-war ghoul. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 03:43, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- The Taliban held out against a superpower for 20 years. I don't see that changing if Biden is dumb enough to stick around.
- Another marker for the graveyard of empires...-Flandres (talk) 03:50, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- I've always found "Afghanistan, the graveyard of empires" stuff overrated. I mean, the British came back and defeated the Afghans only 30 years after they lost (and their empire lasted for much longer). As for the Russians, well, I think there are dozens of reasons that explain better the fall of the Soviet Union rather than their failed invasion, Supposing the US will fall in the foreseeable future, I can also think about many better reasons than this war, though you can say that the decline started in 2001. GeeJayK (talk) 03:55, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- I thought that more referred to the failure of individual invasions than the death of whole empires themselves..-Flandres (talk) 03:57, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- Yeah, that makes more sense. Apparently, more Britons died in the Second Anglo-Afghan War than Afghans, so even if they won one may ask if it was worth it. GeeJayK (talk) 04:01, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- Yeah, that makes more sense. Apparently, more Britons died in the Second Anglo-Afghan War
- I thought that more referred to the failure of individual invasions than the death of whole empires themselves..-Flandres (talk) 03:57, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- One could credit Trump for this, no not the May deadline, but the waking up of policymakers that domestic terrorism is by far a bigger threat to the US than Afghanistan is likely to be in the foreseeable future. Bongolian (talk) 04:04, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- I thought that more referred to the failure of individual invasions than the death of whole empires themselves..-Flandres (talk) 03:57, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- I've always found "Afghanistan, the graveyard of empires" stuff overrated. I mean, the British came back and defeated the Afghans only 30 years after they lost (and their empire lasted for much longer). As for the Russians, well, I think there are dozens of reasons that explain better the fall of the Soviet Union rather than their failed invasion, Supposing the US will fall in the foreseeable future, I can also think about many better reasons than this war, though you can say that the decline started in 2001. GeeJayK (talk) 03:55, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- Say it did happen, how would it effect human rights and living conditions in Afghanistan? Nebuchadnezzar7658 (talk) 04:46, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- If the war ended, high poverty would continue as the world has its hands full with a global pandemic and would not donate significant aid. The Taliban will grow in power and they do not have a good track record on human rights. Poor governance will continue and a high amount of government corruption will continue.
- Another marker for the graveyard of empires...-Flandres (talk) 03:50, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- But at least they would not be a war in their country unless a civil war breaks out.Eat More Vegetables (talk) 13:07, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- I'd like to know what you think happened positively for human rights in Afghanistan in the past 40 years of our eternal meddling there. There were a short spate of "Women free! Elections happen!" stories in 2003-2005, but none of that shit lasted. But every election since 2009 has been marred by issues of voter intimidation by government security forces and ballot stuffing against factions that opposed them. And the local tribal leaders who imposed harsh restrictions on women never lost that power. The state of the world is not improved by eternal war. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 14:17, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- On the plus side, before 2001, the Taliban were cracking down hard on heroin and pedophilia. No, seriously, this is a country full of drug-dealing rapists, and the locals struggle to understand why that's a problem. If the Taliban weren't so rabidly anti-US, they would've been the good guys. Or at least over there, the less-awful guys. If they can reach some sort of "stay out of our business and we won't allow terrorist training camps" situation with the US, it might be the least terrible scenario. CorSock (talk) 14:35, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- I thought the Taliban were involved in the opium trade...-Flandres (talk) 01:51, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- Afghanistan and Pakistan are the largest source countries of opium, largely because the poppy is indigenous to those regions. I've seen some people suggest that organizations like the Taliban assist its production as a form of 'narco-terrorism'. Oh, and @Ikanreed. "There is no instance of a nation benefiting from prolonged war" -Sun Tzu Nebuchadnezzar7658 (talk) 03:52, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- I thought the Taliban were involved in the opium trade...-Flandres (talk) 01:51, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- On the plus side, before 2001, the Taliban were cracking down hard on heroin and pedophilia. No, seriously, this is a country full of drug-dealing rapists, and the locals struggle to understand why that's a problem. If the Taliban weren't so rabidly anti-US, they would've been the good guys. Or at least over there, the less-awful guys. If they can reach some sort of "stay out of our business and we won't allow terrorist training camps" situation with the US, it might be the least terrible scenario. CorSock (talk) 14:35, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
European anti-burqa laws are absurd and abhorrent restrictions on personal freedom[edit]
I don't know what dictionary y'all Euros are reading, but since when did taking away a woman's right to choose count as 'liberation'?. Whether or not a woman chooses to veil is solely her prerogative; any form of government interference in that matter is blatantly tyrannical. The Swiss banning the wearing of the burqa and naqib in public ain't any better than Islamic Iran forcing woman to veil in public (no I don't mean to argue that their punishments are equivalent; it's about the principle of it) Comrade General Pootis (talk) 15:25, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- The anti-burqa laws don't exist because we believe that women are choosing to wear the burqa, but because we believe they are being coerced to wear the burqa. More importantly, there's an actual public safety and criminality concern when you have hundreds of identically masked people running around. CorruptUser 15:55, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- Quran itself says that women shouldn‘t hide their faces. And don‘t forget that muslim women are also forced by their family members to veil. Kevs Ping! 16:03, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- hundreds running around? thats actual dogshit right there. the numbers of people in burqas in europe is miniscule AMassiveGay (talk) 16:26, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- I think he meant face masks, not burkas.. Kevs Ping! 16:42, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- Considering recent circumstance, I think we can safely say large numbers of people wearing face covers ain't a danger to public safety. The coercion argument is ridiculous. The same could be said of damn near any religious practice, so why ain't we banning Orthodox Jews from having payots or Christians from wearing crucifixes? The idea of 'protecting' women from oppression by restricting their ability to choose is absurd double-think. Also, how do these laws in any way actually help women who are being forced to adopt Islamic practices? If anything it just hurts them, either by making their faith less publicly obvious to 3rd parties who could intervene or by encouraging abusive families to further isolate women and restrict their movement Comrade General Pootis (talk) 16:45, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- We went through this discussion in the Salon a bit ago, and my opinion on this was tempered by the Muslim-majority countries that have also banned the burqa (Tajikistan, Tunisia, Chad, Morroco, Algeria, possibly others). Generally if you look into the reasons for the ban in those countries, combating extremism and security reasons are behind the ban. Crosses and payots are common symbols of the respective religions you are talking about, as is the hijab. The burqa is not the hijab. It is typically associated with extremist, militant, ultra fundamentalist sects. So the decision on freedom of expression more falls into the category where Nazi symbols, Ku Klux Klan robes, and other symbols of extremist ideologies are. Not every country chooses to outlaw extremist symbols, but some do, and it's a discussion worthy of debate more than "OMG OUTRAGE FREEDOM OF SPEECH" in my opinion. (I still lean towards free expression, but I'm not the one who has to deal with an occasional idiot hiding a bomb in their burqa.) PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 17:16, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- Agreed, anyone can hide inside a burqa, even men or non-muslims. Kevs Ping! 17:21, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- The burqa bans don't apply to the headscarf, just the burqa or niqab. There's a lot of obviously Islamic dresses and head coverings that don't mask the face. CorSock (talk) 17:43, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- I do not agree with these bans. Not because I think the Burqa ought to be preserved, but because I view Prohibitions type bans as ineffective, as has historically been the case. Perhaps if we actually stepped back and examined the underlying causes of Islamic fundamentalism, more progress might be made. But alas, most politicians seem to have no interest such ponderence, nor in addressing their countries' roles in the current state of affairs... ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 19:00, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- That's simple; the inability to make fun of Islam/Mohammed without fearing for your life.
- Humor is about many things, but it's largely a tool of disempowerment because the highest forms of humor involve something that is both absurd and true. Simple jokes will create a "truth", and then the punchline will reveal some absurdity in this truth. Good comedians won't tell jokes, but point out the absurdity in real life. This takes away the power "holy", unquestionable ideas have over us. This is useful because humans do and believe many absurd things, being able to question these things allows us to remove the useless or even harmful portions while strengthening the good portions, and banning humor is basically making it illegal to point out the absurdities. For example, you'll get more mileage out of singing "every sperm is sacred" than trying to reason with a pro-lifer.
- When it comes to religion, the greatest promoter of Atheism has never been Richard Dawkins giving boring lectures on Atheism, but rather, Family Guy and other forms of entertainment exposing the absurdity of the whole thing, by making Jesus and God the butt of the joke so to speak. Imams watch what happened to Christianity and just how quickly in the past few decades we went from being Jesus-Freaks to even the general public becoming more or less a-religious. They want to make sure that no such thing can happen to Muslims, and so it becomes a capitol offence to even draw Mo, let alone make fun of the guy. As a result, Muslims aren't ever exposed to the absurdity of the story of Mo, and go further and further into the religion and become vulnerable to extremism.CorSock (talk) 19:15, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- Sigh... I seriously wonder why I bother learning about human psychology and behavior when apparently you can just whine about petty shit, miss the heart of the issue, and get a standing ovation... ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 19:21, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- I do not agree with these bans. Not because I think the Burqa ought to be preserved, but because I view Prohibitions type bans as ineffective, as has historically been the case. Perhaps if we actually stepped back and examined the underlying causes of Islamic fundamentalism, more progress might be made. But alas, most politicians seem to have no interest such ponderence, nor in addressing their countries' roles in the current state of affairs... ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 19:00, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- The burqa bans don't apply to the headscarf, just the burqa or niqab. There's a lot of obviously Islamic dresses and head coverings that don't mask the face. CorSock (talk) 17:43, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- Considering recent circumstance, I think we can safely say large numbers of people wearing face covers ain't a danger to public safety. The coercion argument is ridiculous. The same could be said of damn near any religious practice, so why ain't we banning Orthodox Jews from having payots or Christians from wearing crucifixes? The idea of 'protecting' women from oppression by restricting their ability to choose is absurd double-think. Also, how do these laws in any way actually help women who are being forced to adopt Islamic practices? If anything it just hurts them, either by making their faith less publicly obvious to 3rd parties who could intervene or by encouraging abusive families to further isolate women and restrict their movement Comrade General Pootis (talk) 16:45, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- I think he meant face masks, not burkas.. Kevs Ping! 16:42, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- hundreds running around? thats actual dogshit right there. the numbers of people in burqas in europe is miniscule AMassiveGay (talk) 16:26, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- Quran itself says that women shouldn‘t hide their faces. And don‘t forget that muslim women are also forced by their family members to veil. Kevs Ping! 16:03, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- You suggested we look at the root cause of extremism instead, and I gave a huge piece of it. CorSock (talk) 19:35, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- Bigotry against Muslims as human beings might help too. It's easily for recruiters to make strawmen seem compelling when people like Trump seemingly make it their mission to be that strawman.-Flandres (talk) 19:39, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- Do you actually believe that ISIS members just didn’t watch enough Family Guy? I doubt there’s any evidence backing that up, and any that does exist would be confusing correlation with causation (fundamentalist cultures suppress satire, not the other way around). Christopher (talk) 20:08, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you for pointing that out in a softer (and thus more productive) way than I would have. Can I also just add a lot of other things happened in the time Cory described which may have had an impact on Christianity?-Flandres (talk) 20:10, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- Personally I more consider Burqas to be a problem from a security perspective. Burqas are letterbox slit face and body covers. This means that if you wear a burqa, you are basically capable of going around without having any sort of identifiable thing about your person. Good luck finding someone in a burqa, where depending on the situation you may not even be able to visually identify the gender, eye color, skin color or even anything else that we usually use to determine a witness profile; most of us identify these things by the face of the person in question. It'd make solving supermarket theft horrible, because of how easy you'd make it for criminals to simply start wearing burqas to not be identified. Basically, my problem with them is the same reason you can't wear a bataclava in public. Head coverage I have no problem with on this end (and they shouldn't be banned) because they still leave the face visible, which helps you identify the person. Techpriest (I am Alpharius! / / / ) 20:41, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- In most places, other than those which have recently introduced burqa bans, you can wear a balaclava in public legally. In practice you’ll attract a lot of attention, will be refused entry to a lot of places, etc. Have burqa crimes been a major issue in the real world or is this all theoretical? Christopher (talk) 20:47, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- Over here, the burqa ban was in tandem with a ban on balaclavas, they're both outlawed. It was just a generic ban on "face coverings". In practice, if you'd only ban bataclavas, all you'd be doing is moving the goalposts for a criminal to use another item instead which would inevitably lead to the burqa since it's the other fairly easily available complete face covering item, so it's better to do it in one go. I do want to make clear though that I consider it only a good thing from a security perspective. From actually getting rid of fundamentalist Islam, it's not useful beyond reactionary posturing, which is obviously not a good thing. In general, I'd agree with GCs comment below (aside from the first point since I have a different motivation than "stopping fundamentalist Islam" for not liking them) if you actually want to stop fundamentalist islam. Building bonds and communities is far stronger at stopping radicalization (but also is strong at encouraging it, hence why there should be an active effort to create them, because otherwise fundies will create those bonds instead of you) and should be the main focus. Techpriest (I am Alpharius! / / / ) 20:57, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- (EC) Fundamentalist cultures suppress satire because satire is an existential threat to Fundamentalism. No one is ever going to say "I stopped being a Klansman because of a kid's show", but it turns out that yes, the Klan was utterly destroyed by a radio show for kids. CorSock (talk) 20:52, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- Cory, this argument is a non-sequitur when it comes to a burqa ban. Muslim fundamentalists having problems with free speech is a completely different problem. Techpriest (I am Alpharius! / / / ) 21:13, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- Cory, this argument is a non-sequitur when it comes to a burqa ban. Muslim fundamentalists having problems with free speech is a completely different problem. Techpriest (I am Alpharius! /
- Over here, the burqa ban was in tandem with a ban on balaclavas, they're both outlawed. It was just a generic ban on "face coverings". In practice, if you'd only ban bataclavas, all you'd be doing is moving the goalposts for a criminal to use another item instead which would inevitably lead to the burqa since it's the other fairly easily available complete face covering item, so it's better to do it in one go. I do want to make clear though that I consider it only a good thing from a security perspective. From actually getting rid of fundamentalist Islam, it's not useful beyond reactionary posturing, which is obviously not a good thing. In general, I'd agree with GCs comment below (aside from the first point since I have a different motivation than "stopping fundamentalist Islam" for not liking them) if you actually want to stop fundamentalist islam. Building bonds and communities is far stronger at stopping radicalization (but also is strong at encouraging it, hence why there should be an active effort to create them, because otherwise fundies will create those bonds instead of you) and should be the main focus. Techpriest (I am Alpharius! /
- In most places, other than those which have recently introduced burqa bans, you can wear a balaclava in public legally. In practice you’ll attract a lot of attention, will be refused entry to a lot of places, etc. Have burqa crimes been a major issue in the real world or is this all theoretical? Christopher (talk) 20:47, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- Personally I more consider Burqas to be a problem from a security perspective. Burqas are letterbox slit face and body covers. This means that if you wear a burqa, you are basically capable of going around without having any sort of identifiable thing about your person. Good luck finding someone in a burqa, where depending on the situation you may not even be able to visually identify the gender, eye color, skin color or even anything else that we usually use to determine a witness profile; most of us identify these things by the face of the person in question. It'd make solving supermarket theft horrible, because of how easy you'd make it for criminals to simply start wearing burqas to not be identified. Basically, my problem with them is the same reason you can't wear a bataclava in public. Head coverage I have no problem with on this end (and they shouldn't be banned) because they still leave the face visible, which helps you identify the person. Techpriest (I am Alpharius! /
- Thank you for pointing that out in a softer (and thus more productive) way than I would have. Can I also just add a lot of other things happened in the time Cory described which may have had an impact on Christianity?-Flandres (talk) 20:10, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
How to fight Fundy Islam[edit]
- Oppose Bruqa bans. Overtly oppose them.
- Stop making your primary goal secularization.
- Build ties and trust with the community.
- Oppose far-righters who are the main groups pandered to by shit like Burqa bans.
- Oppose prohibitions because THEY DO NOT WORK. See also the previous point.
- Make your primary goal de-radicalization, not de-conversion.
- Oppose blatantly unjust foreign policy in Muslim majority countries. Note this does not mean opposing all foreign policies in such countries.
- Understand actual history concerning the Western powers and Islam.
- Learn fucking psychology and marketing.
- Finally, hopefully, if you actually bother to do all of this shit, the Muslims will get rid of the Burqa themselves. Also they'll turn away from Fundy Islam somewhat.
Dumb fucking ignorant moralists who don't bother learning any of this shit..... ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 20:25, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- But's that the problem. Fundy muslims are too convinced about their views. They won't just get rid of Fundy Islam. Kevs Ping! 05:56, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- I would add, Go green so fundamentalist countries are less able to fund a mentalism.UncleKrampus (talk) 01:02, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
| Shit from Ken |
|---|
The statistics about Muslim Terrorism come from Dr. Peter Hammond's book Slavery, Terrorism and Islam.[16] There used to be a web article citing Hammond's article, but that web article is no longer online. I did find a duplicate of that article though published on another website. "When Muslims reach 10% of the population, they will increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions ( Paris --car-burnings). Any non-Muslim action that offends Islam will result in uprisings and threats (Amsterdam - Mohammed cartoons). |
Fun in Crimea[edit]
https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN2C1219
Looks like conflict is getting much worse. I can only wonder if this will reach full blown war? --Possible KGB Spy (Eyes Shift) (talk) 22:23, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- It's unlikely. With a change of US administration, the Ukrainian government might have been tempted to have a proper crack at retaking some of the ground lost to the separatists. Putin wins just by upping the stakes with the troop build-up, and squelching any such ambitions. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 00:09, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- Probably true. Russians can't afford an extensive war effort without immiserating the public, so the best way to prevent a slide into war is to present as if war is exactly what Putin wants. He is likely quite wary of the Biden administration.UncleKrampus (talk) 00:25, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- If the US went to war with Russia the US would have a major advantage: State of Alaska. The US could easily have troops land in Siberia and have a highly stable supply chain. There is the fact that there are countries in Asia that do not like Russia. So Russia starting a war would be suicide on their part. --Possible KGB Spy (Eyes Shift) (talk) 01:31, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- That's if the war doesn't go nuclear. Any war between the US and Russia that has a clear possibility of victory for one side will go nuclear... CorruptUser 02:11, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- Wars between nuclear powers must always be by proxy while every relevant power is in possession of their sanity. (weed edit) Victory must be subjectively possible for the relevant and sane sides. (relevancy can vanish in a moment if millions of dead people from a North Korean attack becomes a rap battle threat or otherwise trivial /end weed edit)Troops landing on Russian soil, even in the far east, is definitely in the dark grey area of MAD. If the Ukraine succeeds in joining NATO, then I expect very strict orders regarding the Russian border and an escalation in Russian rhetoric if the Ukrainian army successfully pushes the "volunteers" out of the East. Artificius (talk) 02:55, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- Ukraine ain't far-off Vietnam or Afghanistan; it's the 8th largest nation in Europe. It simply couldn't handle a direct military intervention by a foreign power without it immediately escalating into a full-scale shooting war between NATO and Russia. Comrade General Pootis (talk) 18:45, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- Wars between nuclear powers must always be by proxy while every relevant power is in possession of their sanity. (weed edit) Victory must be subjectively possible for the relevant and sane sides. (relevancy can vanish in a moment if millions of dead people from a North Korean attack becomes a rap battle threat or otherwise trivial /end weed edit)Troops landing on Russian soil, even in the far east, is definitely in the dark grey area of MAD. If the Ukraine succeeds in joining NATO, then I expect very strict orders regarding the Russian border and an escalation in Russian rhetoric if the Ukrainian army successfully pushes the "volunteers" out of the East. Artificius (talk) 02:55, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- That's if the war doesn't go nuclear. Any war between the US and Russia that has a clear possibility of victory for one side will go nuclear... CorruptUser 02:11, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- If the US went to war with Russia the US would have a major advantage: State of Alaska. The US could easily have troops land in Siberia and have a highly stable supply chain. There is the fact that there are countries in Asia that do not like Russia. So Russia starting a war would be suicide on their part. --Possible KGB Spy (Eyes Shift) (talk) 01:31, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- Probably true. Russians can't afford an extensive war effort without immiserating the public, so the best way to prevent a slide into war is to present as if war is exactly what Putin wants. He is likely quite wary of the Biden administration.UncleKrampus (talk) 00:25, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
The US-Russia are both nuclear powers and no nuclear powers have ever gone to war.
80% of all USA energy comes from oil, gas and coal (Less than 5% comes from wind and solar).[18] Russia is a major oil and gas producer. Russia holds 6.4% of the world’s oil and 17.3% of the world’s reserves in natural gas.[19]
It takes time for a country to change its energy production/usage in terms of what type of energy it produces/consumes. America is not going to war against Russia.MarnetteB (talk) 04:08, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- You assume it wouldn't be Russia wars Ukraine and then America wars Russia after Europe wars Russia and China wars Taiwan because they (Russia and China) were waiting for either of the two (three with India vs. China/Pakistan) playing geopolitical musical chairs with America to stumble first and see who gets stuck with the bill of aging American hardware smashing your allies or even own infrastructure to shit while their diplomats try to find ways of saying "Why'djou make us do it, huh?" and struggling to keep the threat of nuclear retaliation viable and unused (despite the then open warfare and one of the sides having an absolutely anarchic flow of information). It's a stupid game we're playing, and even if we can all laugh about it in a thousand years it will still be a stupid prize. Artificius (talk) 04:20, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- Meh. The real danger of nuclear weapons was never someone willingly ending the world, but rather, some idiotic accident causing the wrong people to think someone else was ending the world. Remember; the US accidentally dropped a nuke on itself once before, and nuclear bombs were loaded onto planes by mistake. Russia is probably worse when it comes to that, and India is a sick joke when it comes to anything government or military. Even if the others are relatively safe, it's only increasing the chances of a giant fuckup that causing the entire world to burn. I'm no hippy, but we all need to cut down our arsenals a bit... CorruptUser 05:10, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- The more I proceed in this autistic life, the more I wonder about language and comprehension and consistency. Every edit is an invitation to examine the fossil record. edit: you're not a hippy to think "we" should cut down "our" arsenals. I only wish I was more than a peasant but less than an administrator to convey your message.Artificius (talk) 05:21, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- Meh. The real danger of nuclear weapons was never someone willingly ending the world, but rather, some idiotic accident causing the wrong people to think someone else was ending the world. Remember; the US accidentally dropped a nuke on itself once before, and nuclear bombs were loaded onto planes by mistake. Russia is probably worse when it comes to that, and India is a sick joke when it comes to anything government or military. Even if the others are relatively safe, it's only increasing the chances of a giant fuckup that causing the entire world to burn. I'm no hippy, but we all need to cut down our arsenals a bit... CorruptUser 05:10, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Pigments question[edit]
What could be done with the new 'whitest paint' [20] and 'Black 3.0' and what woo or other fancy concepts be spun from their use? 'Dazzle camouflage and various optical illusions' are practical applications - but what else? Anna Livia (talk) 09:55, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- There are various methods of using daylight to light large buildings, with the use of skylights, light wells, windows, and reflecting mirrors saving energy and possibly providing more flattering and pleasant lighting than electrics. Using white paint would be significantly easier and less confusing/intrusive than putting mirrors everywhere. --Annanoon (talk) 15:02, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- Also [21].
- So other uses for the paint - and what shade of grey would arise from an equal admixture? Anna Livia (talk) 18:23, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Why haven't people thought of this before?[edit]
Hear me out. So say you're in a zombie apocalypse. A marauding horde of the undead, five or ten strong, is zerg rushing straight toward you. Your only weapon is a switchblade. The human skull, for all its flaws, is actually able to stop small-caliber bullets from a long distance, so going for the head is no good. Then why don't people aim for the spine? The spine not only keeps the body erect, but is a hub for the nervous system, which is the only thing that allows the zombies to move. If people did this more in zombie novels, it would save a lot of time and toil. Roman Sionis tends to be inactive during summer 14:26, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- Have you tried to kill an animal by stabbing it in the spine? Bullfighters try this a lot but aren't particularly successful. Also, one difference between bulls and people, if they're coming at you in the normal forwards direction, the spine is at the back of the human zombie protected by their entire body, so it's even harder to hit. Beheading is the only way to go. --Annanoon (talk) 15:07, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- maybe the same magic that reanimates the dead has something to do with it AMassiveGay (talk) 15:50, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- Couple problems with this: 1.With the exception of .22, maybe, there ain't any caliber that couldn't penetrate a skull at any range at which you'd be able to effectively aim a pistol. 2.Targeting the spine would require you to be behind the target. 3.Stabbing through someone's spine ain't exceptionally easy either. 4.Where destroying the brain would outright kill it, striking the spine would only render the zombie paralyzed below where the damage is, so it'd likely still have partial control over its arms and upper body. 5.Regardless of where you aim, engaging in hand-to-hand combat with a zombie, especially with such a short weapon, would be suicidal. Comrade General Pootis (talk) 18:31, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- Of course zombies are already dead and their muscles and nervous systems are already not working - so really they shouldn't be moving anyway. As AMassiveGay seems to suggest, the best explanation for zombies continuing to move is "zombie magic". That being the case you don't need a gun but rather an anti-zombie spell-book. Harry Potter would be more effective than Robocop.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 19:42, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- Couple problems with this: 1.With the exception of .22, maybe, there ain't any caliber that couldn't penetrate a skull at any range at which you'd be able to effectively aim a pistol. 2.Targeting the spine would require you to be behind the target. 3.Stabbing through someone's spine ain't exceptionally easy either. 4.Where destroying the brain would outright kill it, striking the spine would only render the zombie paralyzed below where the damage is, so it'd likely still have partial control over its arms and upper body. 5.Regardless of where you aim, engaging in hand-to-hand combat with a zombie, especially with such a short weapon, would be suicidal. Comrade General Pootis (talk) 18:31, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- maybe the same magic that reanimates the dead has something to do with it AMassiveGay (talk) 15:50, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Founding member of Oath Keepers pleads guilty, will work with feds[edit]
The first domino falls.[22]-RipCityLiberal (talk) 17:12, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- They always turn supergrass Comrade General Pootis (talk) 18:00, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Ark of the Covenant clarification[edit]
I’ve been reading about the ark of the covenant lately, I’ve stuck to skeptical and scientific sources but I’m still not understanding it. So, the original ark of the covenant was a religious relic that was associated with the exodus story from the bible? And replica’s of it were made? The divine powers as well as the claim that it held stone tablets of the 10 commandments are most likely just myths that arose later on?
I guess what confuses me is the amount of fantasy associated with it, so the ark was a real physical object at one point in time but nothing more?—WMS (talk) 13:43, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- If I remember my OT myths correctly the Ark was constructed by command of the OT God. It contained the "original" Ten Commandments was carried around by the Israelites during their time in the wilderness and eventually ended up the the temple. Again from memoery it was carried in battle occasionally and gave them some magic superiority - except for when it didn't and it was captured by their enemies for a time.
- But the whole of Exedous is about as believable as The Hobbit so it's original reality is pretty dubious. Although it was probably never "real" it's magicness made it great fodder for later fantasy stories.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 13:57, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- There's probably little if any truth in the myth of a magic gold plated chest that the Old Testament Israelites were supposed to have carried around with them. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 15:14, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- Also, it's doubtful that Israelites as a group were ever in Egypt.[23] Bongolian (talk) 20:28, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- The magic part is doubtful, yes. But the Ark itself? Really rather possible, perhaps even probable. The texts do give rather detailed instructions/descriptions of the artifact in question, and there's no reason why it couldn't have been built and carried-- far stranger things have been made and revered in the name of religion. If nothing else, the Israelites were developing a rather sophisticated religion, especially by the standards of a nomadic people (Well, starting out that way).
- I'm rather of the opinion that there probably was an Ark, a revered artifact acting as the symbol of JHVH, but not "a radio for talking to God". Kencolt (talk) 21:32, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- If you believe the Ethiopian Orthodox Church they apparently have the ark in the Church of Axum. You're not allowed to look at it or take photos, so no one has been able to verify their claims. SonOfStranger (talk) 00:43, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- "A real physical object... but nothing more" Probably less. Can you source some of the things you've been reading? Gol Sarnitt (talk) 05:22, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- The probability that an object contained the tablets of stone with the second version of the Ten Commandments written on them by god it pretty close to zero.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 14:24, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- Ah so, obviously, the magical properties are nothing more than tales. The reason I found this interesting is because it reminds me of the Holy Grail but more people are willing to accept the ark because (as someone pointed out on this thread) the instructions were there and, overall, the object could just be a mundane artefact.
- The probability that an object contained the tablets of stone with the second version of the Ten Commandments written on them by god it pretty close to zero.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 14:24, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- "A real physical object... but nothing more" Probably less. Can you source some of the things you've been reading? Gol Sarnitt (talk) 05:22, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- If you believe the Ethiopian Orthodox Church they apparently have the ark in the Church of Axum. You're not allowed to look at it or take photos, so no one has been able to verify their claims. SonOfStranger (talk) 00:43, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- Also, it's doubtful that Israelites as a group were ever in Egypt.[23] Bongolian (talk) 20:28, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- There's probably little if any truth in the myth of a magic gold plated chest that the Old Testament Israelites were supposed to have carried around with them. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 15:14, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- Regarding the sources, these are where I read about the Ark: Skeptoid episode on the ark, Phys.org article on the ark, LiveScience article on the ark. I also re-read the Wikipedia article on the matter a few times.--WMS (talk) 14:57, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- Awesome, thank you. It's the weekend. I'm sorry if I was selling you short, I'm a big fan of you. I will try to not get exhausted with the source material. I started working on Javascript in PDF these past few days to finally consistently automate a lot of the crap I have to do manually, it's a nightmare. I will make an attempt, but I can't promise a better outcome than my eyes rolling back in my head from information overload. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 02:05, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
James O'Keefe has been suspended from Twitter after a "sting" on CNN[edit]
And it looks like people are making a martyr out of him, going off of stuff a camera operator is saying --DoomTay (talk) 18:03, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- Oh no, the crazy people who believe a serial slanderer are going to be crazy now? ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 04:45, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
IM academy, social media, and the rise of antimlm[edit]
Anyone here want to share the experiences they’ve had;if any, with the latest craze on the mlm trendmill IM academy and the effect it has on social media with all these forex Scammers Promoters trying to post how much money they earn from their Live demo trading accounts on social media. Most of these promoters do not make that much money [24] . Im academy has also been banned in some European countries and has contributed to a rise of antimlmers who call these scammers out on their bullshit. Also started a draft for Im academy for anyone that has something to contribute Draft:IM Mastery Academy SensaurC-137 (talk) 02:15, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
- I took a brief peek and all I'll say is you're much better off trading Bitcoin and Gamestop type Reddit meme options. Not that these plays aren't fucking hella risky, but at least there is a little stability in established cryptocurrency (sort of), and options trading is well documented (more power to you if you gamble on a stock valued high solely because some nostalgic Redditors say so, but whatever). Established forex trading is pretty risky, because currency is pretty volatile. Bullshit forex trading, hidden behind some fucked up fluffy algorithm names (what the fuck is "harmonic scanner", "swipecoin scalper", or "delorean" tools?) and fluffed with MLM marketing pyramid power? I wouldn't be surprised if whoever is running this eventually ends up in jail. PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 05:23, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
- The structure is set up to where the higher ranking members(the chairmen) frame themselves as successful entrepreneurs or CEOs of some “trading business” when its just a front group and disguse for the Im academy mlm. Many of them can be seen flaunting their so called earnings on social media and trying to promote wannabe rapper lifestyle. It has become a huge craze as their main targets are college aged kids (18-25) or younger and often racial minority groups. Pre-pandemic they could be seen on college campuses across the country.SensaurC-137 (talk) 13:22, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
- I just personally hate that IM academy exploits minority groups into believing they are actually entrepreneurs and not sales agents.They completely insult and make a mockery of what real entrepreneurship is. Even the higher ranking members are brainwashed by an upline on how to use better
brainwashingrecruitment tatics. Its like watching a snake eating its own tail.SensaurC-137 (talk) 00:52, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
Remember kids- failing science class does not mean you are enlightened[edit]
Wonder if Flat Earthers will get the idea that failing science and not comprehending big numbers does not make them smart? The existence of Flat Earthers goes to show that there is something wrong with our education system. --Possible KGB Spy (Eyes Shift) (talk) 00:34, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
- You know, I don't think you need to strawman the dumbest motherfuckers on the planet this way. They're already real fucking dumb, you don't need to pretend they value failing classes. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 04:46, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
- I'm with ikanreed on this one, kinxz, like, if you want to make a joke, don't lead with and finish on your disdain. I'm sure you done biology or physics more seriously than, say, the average flat earther, but I heard a joke that is completely unrelated to this, and it was good. "this song makes me want to wear a helmet without riding my bike." Here's another joke, why did the Seaman cross the road? Because I wore the wrong sock today, also not my joke, the smugness is a real result of finding the argument yourself, but you're not breaking comedy barriers. Neither was I, so you can just have it. If the towers fell straight down, either the earth is flat or 9-11 was fake. It's a garbage joke, you have to know what's going on, there is no physical audience for it. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 06:16, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
- There is certainly a problem somewhere which results in people believing the Earth is flat, that all the Quanon nonsense is true or that 5G causes Covid. But the thing is what "wrong" is not necessarily the same as "stupid". Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 17:26, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
- I'm with ikanreed on this one, kinxz, like, if you want to make a joke, don't lead with and finish on your disdain. I'm sure you done biology or physics more seriously than, say, the average flat earther, but I heard a joke that is completely unrelated to this, and it was good. "this song makes me want to wear a helmet without riding my bike." Here's another joke, why did the Seaman cross the road? Because I wore the wrong sock today, also not my joke, the smugness is a real result of finding the argument yourself, but you're not breaking comedy barriers. Neither was I, so you can just have it. If the towers fell straight down, either the earth is flat or 9-11 was fake. It's a garbage joke, you have to know what's going on, there is no physical audience for it. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 06:16, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
Oh, For Fuck's Sake[edit]
It happened again. This makes me wonder what other countries are doing. This is the third mass shooting with over 5 deaths during the past 2 months.— Jeh2ow Damn son! 12:19, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- Welcome to America. This bullshit has gone on for decades. It's likely not going to change, as America's gun culture is both childishly masochist and identity ingrained. PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 12:32, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- I'm still waiting for the "'No Way To Prevent This,' Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens" article. Rockford the Roe boop my snootpraise Oscar Wilde 14:28, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- The thing I'm concerned about is that even if Biden bans assault weapons, Republicans would override the ban if they got the White House.— Jeh2ow Damn son! 16:12, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Rockford the Roe Every. Single. Time.-RipCityLiberal (talk) 17:13, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- Mass shootings is a result of 1) A pitiful gun regulation problem and 2) A violence problem. People focus 99% of the narrative on the first. It's an extremely important part of the narrative but not all of it. Though the narrative re gun-control it often gets bogged down into a conversation whether guns should be allowed or not rather than one of effectively regulating guns. After all, a few western countries have a high rate of firearms per capita (not as high as the US but still high) but also have very strict regulations. And in these countries mass shootings are rarities. But in any case, all of this monopolises the narrative when "violence" should be discussed just as much. And the rates of violence, in general, in the United States is astronomically high compared with other western countries as well. All forms of violence. These levels of violence are partially a result of extreme wealth inequality, horrific police practices, racism, lack of social programs and a general policy of "go fuck yourself" to the poor and those in need in many states. Other western countries have at least a semblance of a safety net, social programs, health care and are at least pretending to deal with wealth inequality. That isn't to say that a few Western countries don't also have issues with violence, especially in a few suburban areas in Paris and London. But they seem like peanuts compared with to Detroit or Baltimore. As with all things...just compare everything about the US on a per-capita basis with their culturally similar neighbour Canada. Extreme gun control and policies that reduce levels of violence and comparatively little gun violence. I don't see how any approach to dealing with mass shooting could be effective without dealing with both gun regulations and the causes of high levels of violence. ShabiDOO 18:23, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Rockford the Roe: And here's your Onion article from Friday's shooting. Per Wikipedia, the 18th time they've run this article in seven years. I say this as there's a more "minor" mass shooting (3 dead) going on in an Austin shopping center right now.
- Shabidoo: Yes, when financial disparities are the greatest, the murder rate tends to be high. That seems to include mass shootings. I don't think it explains everything, though... from my perspective, the United States is quite a bit more dangerous than a country like Malaysia (which has a similar Gini coefficient, but really strict gun laws). On the other hand, the US is not by far the most violent place in the world... many South / Central American and African countries easily are worse. Certainly improving safety nets would help, but so would some gun regulations -- I think Canada's model would fit pretty well here, but one would have to ignore the NRA obsessed gun trolls. PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 21:19, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Rockford the Roe: And here's your Onion article from Friday's shooting. Per Wikipedia,
- Mass shootings is a result of 1) A pitiful gun regulation problem and 2) A violence problem. People focus 99% of the narrative on the first. It's an extremely important part of the narrative but not all of it. Though the narrative re gun-control it often gets bogged down into a conversation whether guns should be allowed or not rather than one of effectively regulating guns. After all, a few western countries have a high rate of firearms per capita (not as high as the US but still high) but also have very strict regulations. And in these countries mass shootings are rarities. But in any case, all of this monopolises the narrative when "violence" should be discussed just as much. And the rates of violence, in general, in the United States is astronomically high compared with other western countries as well. All forms of violence. These levels of violence are partially a result of extreme wealth inequality, horrific police practices, racism, lack of social programs and a general policy of "go fuck yourself" to the poor and those in need in many states. Other western countries have at least a semblance of a safety net, social programs, health care and are at least pretending to deal with wealth inequality. That isn't to say that a few Western countries don't also have issues with violence, especially in a few suburban areas in Paris and London. But they seem like peanuts compared with to Detroit or Baltimore. As with all things...just compare everything about the US on a per-capita basis with their culturally similar neighbour Canada. Extreme gun control and policies that reduce levels of violence and comparatively little gun violence. I don't see how any approach to dealing with mass shooting could be effective without dealing with both gun regulations and the causes of high levels of violence. ShabiDOO 18:23, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Rockford the Roe Every. Single. Time.-RipCityLiberal (talk) 17:13, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- The thing I'm concerned about is that even if Biden bans assault weapons, Republicans would override the ban if they got the White House.— Jeh2ow Damn son! 16:12, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
China further tightens the screws on feminists[edit]
|
|
|---|
|
A Chinese platform is erasing “radical” accounts that shun men and the patriarchy.Jimmymco234 (talk) 18:22, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
That is a bad anology. Surely there is a reason or reasons why China, which is a left of center government and whose communist leaders must be an atheist to be a member of the Chinese Communist Party, engaged in such behavior against feminists. Next, the article The Surprising Discovery About Those Colonialist, Proselytizing Missionaries published in Christianity Today notes about Protestant missionaries (not Catholic missionaries):
So countries that are the freest and most democratic countries in the world and do not have oppressive governments have a Protestant cultural legacy. In addition, these countries have high educational development for women. Now are all countries that have an atheist cultural legacy the most free and less authoritarian countries in the world and a great place for women? Absolutely not! If you doubt this, go to China where over 1.3 billion people are under an oppressive government according Amnesty International, the BBC and other organizations.[29][30][31] Another key point: I would further point out, that if the USA (which has a Protestant cultural legacy) were a bad country, then the Biden administration wouldn't be having a border crisis now where people from all over the world (especially Latin America) are pouring into the USA as illegal immigrants. God bless America! And remember, biblical Christianity claims the first people to see the risen Christ were women, not men. In addition, Mother's Day, which is a wonderful day for many women and is now practiced in many parts of the world, was first practiced in the USA.Krodasrap (talk) 19:32, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
|
How long will it be before Trump becomes dirt poor?[edit]
Not often do I wish for a person to lose money but Trump is a special case.
The lawsuits against Trump have yet to be sorted out. Scheduling nightmare for the courts. Let's not forget the German bank who wants it's money and the big bad IRS who wants Trump to pay back taxes. --Possible KGB Spy (Eyes Shift) (talk) 00:56, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
- He won’t. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 01:21, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
- I doubt that he can dodge every lawsuit against him. A few maybe. --Possible KGB Spy (Eyes Shift) (talk) 01:30, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
- Sure, but then he can just have someone write a book in his name or just ask the Dipshit Caucus for money. A guy like that never stops finding ways to live it up. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 02:19, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
- Whatever revenge you want to magically occur to donald trump will not happen. Karma, while a nice idea, is not real. There's no universal force like gravity that draws objects towards justice. If you want justice, fight for it. And also be distressed at how resistant to it the US legal system is. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 03:05, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
- Sure, but then he can just have someone write a book in his name or just ask the Dipshit Caucus for money. A guy like that never stops finding ways to live it up.
- I doubt that he can dodge every lawsuit against him. A few maybe. --Possible KGB Spy (Eyes Shift) (talk) 01:30, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
|
|
|---|
Trump moved to Florida. "Florida, for instance, is known for having especially strong “homestead” laws that guard one’s primary residence against creditors. That has prompted a number of wealthy people to declare residency in the state."[33]MSWC (talk) 03:44, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
Your MSN article says: "The ultra wealthy can generally stay rich by diversifying their holdings".[36] The Trump Organization consists of 500 companies. That's a lot of diversification. And Trump moving to Florida where they have tough homestead laws is a sign he understands asset protection. Trump also receives a $219,000 a year from his presidential pension. Trump's base is fiercely loyal and they would snap up any books he personally wrote or had a ghostwriter write. Trump is about to launch a social media website where he could sell books or other merchandise. Trump becoming dirt poor is a fantasy of his political opponents and not grounded in reality.PAWA91NTWAYD (talk) 11:02, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
|
Since Chauvin/BLM is in the News...[edit]
Plus my recent edits to Anarchism... I have a serious question when it comes to the Anarchist replacement for the police.
The harsh reality is that whether society is structured the way it is right now or the hypothetical perfect Anarchist version, short of some sort of purge/genocide, the very same people that exist in today's society will exist in an Anarchist society. Most anarchists seem to be under the impression that a professional, trained police force could be replaced by some variation of community volunteers. The problem I have with this is, well, who volunteers for such things? Well, for starters, the same people that would volunteer to either be cops right now, or worse, the same people that are in the various "community watch" programs already in existence, you know, the ones rejected by the police forces of the country. For instance, George Zimmerman, the guy who mistook a teenage kid for a thief, got into a fight, and ending up killing a child who was otherwise minding his own business. This is pretty much the event that created the modern Black Lives Matter movement, even if it wasn't named such at the time.
So then, my question is really, in what way would an anarchist-style law enforcement be meaningfully different from a community watch? What prevents these community watches from being staffed by the George Zimmerman's of the world? CorSock (talk) 18:50, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
- Short answer
people are goodnothing. This article by the UMD professor and politcal scientist Mancur Olson is one of my favorite articles ever, it might interest you. Some day I'll lambast Anarchy and it will be one of my sources. GeeJayK (talk) 19:01, 19 April 2021 (UTC) - [EC]How does a world full of George Zimmermans have an anarchist revolution in the first place? It doesn’t. If you introduce This (entirely reasonable) level of practicality to anarchist ideas they immediately fall apart anyway.
- If we do pretend an anarchist revolution is plausible, then you’re absolutely right. The capitol hill autonomous zone is a recent example of an anarchist society in the USA, and within a few days of its creation two black teenagers had been shot. Christopher (talk) 19:05, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
- That article seems to say a lot of what of what I've been saying about The Mafia and other criminal gangs. Heck, that literally describes Genghis Khan's domestic policy in China; why plunder 1,000,000 bolts of silk when he could get 500,000 bolts every single year forever? May wish to read the whole thing and not just your abstract.
- As for the George Zimmerman case, would it be worth adding it to the Anarchism piece in the Police section? I am really unsure how to do so, especially without any sources.CorSock (talk) 19:33, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
- the capital hill autonmous zone was set up to fail to begin and cannot be used as an example of the falings of anarchism AMassiveGay (talk) 19:40, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
- (EC) Yeah, the article is excelent. The literature about this kind of problem is very big, actually, it goes back not to Hobbes and Locke, but machiavelli, at least, he was one of the first to realize that a non state army doesn't stand a chance. I recommend this one, too. As the name suggests, it was written by an Austrian, but it's still a good article, and like the other, it's not very big. There are also two of my favorite books, Anarchy State and Utopia by Harvard Philosopher Robert Nozick, if you want a more dense, abstract stuff, and The Narrow Corridor, by Daron Acemoglu (MIT economist) and Jim Robinson (University of Chicago Political Scientist), which is easier and more historical even if it can be boring some times. Both are great. Now I gave you the keys and I don't need to bother about that article anymore. GeeJayK (talk) 19:41, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
- I really wish you (and the anarchists) would stop acting like the CHAZ was an example of anarchism... ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 20:53, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
- Also Nozick sucked. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 21:13, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
- He's fractally wrong in the real world and he admits it, but I still like some of the ideas, like the utility monster and the Experience machine, among others. Also, I mentioned him because he advanced the idea that societies without a centralized government are doomed. Problem is that his fans think that if you disagree with him you're basically supporting slavery. GeeJayK (talk) 21:17, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
- Hayek's fans are similar. Both of fans are equally adorable and infuriating. Also the utility monster has been solved if I remember my history of moral philosophy correctly. I'd also like to point out, however, that Anarchism does not mean there is no centralized administrative body. It can entail that, depending on the variant, but it can also not entail that. It actually rather depends on the group or figure. Let me put it this way, Anarchism is basically pure Democracy taken to its logical endpoint. Its counter school of thought is Republicanism which argues that a nation-state ought to exist to provide for the common good, and to ensure order and a lack of mob rule. Finally, I'd just like to point out that neither school of thought has survived in its pure form in practice thus far, at least not without some seriously fucked up shit occurring. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 21:33, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
- (EC) Most the libertarian actually believe that if you disagree with them you support slavery, some are just worse. I was one, and I see how they treat their philosophy as a cult. I acknowledged your point, but most of these authors are talking about a modern state as we know it (except for Nozick, as his model of state is basically a monopolistic company and Holcome, who believes that force is a natural monopoly), and they argue that without a modern state, some goods cannot be provided, especially security. In other worlds, they believe that coercion, authority and (what anarchists probably hate the most) hierarchy are not only desirable to a certain point, but also inevitable. I like to use the word "stateless" for the lack of state proper and "anarchy" for the ideal type that is supported by anarchists. GeeJayK (talk) 21:44, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
- @GeeJayK Oh, it appears we had some level of a miscommunication. I personally subscribe to the idea of a hybrid system and believe that some level of cohesion is justified to ensure a healthy socio-economic system. I'm doing my best to lay out the underpinnings and aims of anarchism, which is a bit difficult at times because well, I'm not an anarchist and do not subscribe to their ideologies. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 21:53, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
- (EC) Most the libertarian actually believe that if you disagree with them you support slavery, some are just worse. I was one, and I see how they treat their philosophy as a cult. I acknowledged your point, but most of these authors are talking about a modern state as we know it (except for Nozick, as his model of state is basically a monopolistic company and Holcome, who believes that force is a natural monopoly), and they argue that without a modern state, some goods cannot be provided, especially security. In other worlds, they believe that coercion, authority and (what anarchists probably hate the most) hierarchy are not only desirable to a certain point, but also inevitable. I like to use the word "stateless" for the lack of state proper and "anarchy" for the ideal type that is supported by anarchists. GeeJayK (talk) 21:44, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
- Hayek's fans are similar. Both of fans are equally adorable and infuriating. Also the utility monster has been solved if I remember my history of moral philosophy correctly. I'd also like to point out, however, that Anarchism does not mean there is no centralized administrative body. It can entail that, depending on the variant, but it can also not entail that. It actually rather depends on the group or figure. Let me put it this way, Anarchism is basically pure Democracy
- He's fractally wrong in the real world and he admits it, but I still like some of the ideas, like the utility monster and the Experience machine, among others. Also, I mentioned him because he advanced the idea that societies without a centralized government are doomed. Problem is that his fans think that if you disagree with him you're basically supporting slavery. GeeJayK (talk) 21:17, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
- Also Nozick sucked. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 21:13, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
- I really wish you (and the anarchists) would stop acting like the CHAZ was an example of anarchism... ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 20:53, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
If you want to make fun of France for surrendering in WW2 or America's clusterfuck in Vietnam, remember that Australia lost a war to Emus[edit]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emu_War
See, at least most countries did not lose a war to Emus. It is perfectly fine to pick at Australia for losing to Emus. --Possible KGB Spy (Eyes Shift) (talk) 01:07, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
- Not really.
- Nazis and Veitnamese Guerrillas are easy. But Emus are freaking demonic evil incarnate in Ostrich clothing. Kencolt (talk) 07:10, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
- Emus don't recognise the rules of war, the Geneva convention, the concept of innocent by standers. They're evil fucking things that taste mighty fine on a barbie Cardinal Chang (talk) 11:44, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for posting this. It's the funniest article I've ever read on Wikipedia (though, to be fair that's a low bar). But it made me laugh out loud. I would suggest an article for RW but I can't quite see the mission angle.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 09:37, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- Ah yes, Australia. Land of dinosaurs of birds that can kick through car windshields and giant demonic spiders that can eat your face. No wonder they lost. --Goatspeed. Happy Holidays!🎄CircularRasoning🎄Prototype lab 19:18, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- Ah yes, Australia. Land of dinosaurs of birds that can kick through car windshields and giant demonic spiders that can eat your face. No wonder they lost. --Goatspeed. Happy Holidays!🎄CircularR
- Thanks for posting this. It's the funniest article I've ever read on Wikipedia (though, to be fair that's a low bar). But it made me laugh out loud. I would suggest an article for RW but I can't quite see the mission angle.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 09:37, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- Emus don't recognise the rules of war, the Geneva convention, the concept of innocent by standers. They're evil fucking things that taste mighty fine on a barbie Cardinal Chang (talk) 11:44, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
Emus are dangerous[edit]
Fear them. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 19:19, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- Our Texan friend is more correct than you might think. An emu's kick is capable of penetrating steel and disemboweling a human. Roman Sionis tends to be inactive during summer 14:45, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
The actual ending is not widely known[edit]
The Emu War is actually the second nuclear war. The Australians found the loss unacceptable, so they finished it under cover of nuclear tests.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Totem
But this hasn't been publicized much. 192․168․1․42 (talk) 22:48, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
The Brazilian counterpart[edit]
Wanna get pissed with Brazil? We won a "battle" against a pod of porpoises during the First World War. GeeJayK (talk) 01:02, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
I Watched the New Mortal Kombat Movie[edit]
First, I will say I enjoyed it a million times more than Godzilla V Kong. Second, I will say I watched it dubbed in Russian, with Hindi subtitles, so I have no clue what was said. Third, I will admit a guy at work made the point that maybe that's exactly what saved the movie for me. Finally, I will admit to being smug about watching it before its US release and try not to spoil anything. I mean, it's based on Mortal Kombat, one of my least favorite fighting games, I might have just enjoyed finding it. But I do that kind of regularly, so I dunno, probably not it.
It is one of the darkest movies I've ever seen. By which I mean, if you don't have high contrast and definition, you probably can't see anything. The director, if not also the director for videography, clearly has a boner for the idea of lighting half of a face, very cool lighting technique but like your entire movie? There's one specific moment where it's like "Whoah, hold on, wait, where's the light coming from, why am I suddenly looking at the opposite half of this guy's face?" The final fight is like, so extremely well done that I have to assume that was the budget, even if it takes place in like an unfinished Nth story of an office building. Like, that's the magic warp place the big bad lives in? Awesome fight choreography, I mean WOW and for the first time it's actually visible. If you wanted to have that fight, you probably should have made a completely different movie. But I enjoyed calling out beats and groaning about upcoming beats and seeing them play out exactly as I called them. If you have played Mortal Kombat, it's OK. It was hot garbage. Godzilla v Kong was cool garbage. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 04:14, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- i have to ask do you watch any movies that can objectively be considered 'good'? AMassiveGay (talk) 13:25, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- Probably not. My top 5, if I have to rattle them off, in no particular order are 'I <3 Huckabees', 'Rushmore', 'The Great Waldo Pepper', 'Grave of the Fireflies', and 'Parasite' I mean, my top five is always open. I watched 'Suspiria' in Russian, it was very cool, juxtaposing niche social/work demands and body horror. I watched the 'Made in Abyss' anime movies, very cool, juxtaposing chibi characters and gross societal demands with some body horror. I watched Saw 2, alright, juxtapose moral dilemma with body horror. I watched Saw 3... I liked the new Mortal Kombat movie for what it was, but it was nothing special save for the final fight scene which rocked, but also was confusing for reasons I won't spoil, is that fair? Feel free to name a recent movie release that I should watch. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 02:14, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
- you mention rushmore which is interesting because im a big fan of wes anderson. you cant go wrong with anything there (that might make me a hipster of some kind). even moonrise kingdom is good even though on paper its sounded wank. ive not seen the one about the dogs yet though. im have trouble maintaining my focus on films these days for reasons so i have nothing particularly new to recommend. AMassiveGay (talk) 11:43, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
- I totally get you. I tend to watch movies in batches. Like, some weekend I will decide to watch a movie, and it will just remind me that I wanted to see all the other movies and I'll rip through a list. It may sound hipster of me, but I've loved Wes Anderson movies for a long time. Life Aquatic and Bottle Rocket are big fun characters fumbling through their own lives kind of adventures. I didn't hate Moonrise Kingdom, but it didn't hit like the ones before it and I really didn't feel anything in Grand Budapest Hotel other than "There goes Wes doing his blurring of stage and film again." Newer movies that I think are really good... Knives Out was fun and really well made. Midsommar was 2019, but I mean we didn't get a lot, and it's pretty good, I disagree with people who say it's the same exact movie as Hereditary. If you haven't seen Parasite yet, well, strap in and maybe drink a cup of coffee before you start because there is a lot of movie going on all at once in that movie. But most of the last few years haven't really piqued my interest. I watched The Lighthouse, it was good. It's hard to trust top-billing, and it's hard to find the stuff that flies under the radar, because, I agree, I'm not going to watch every single movie. I really have to be in a movie watching mood, which for me always includes an effort. I can't really help myself. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 02:19, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- you mention rushmore which is interesting because im a big fan of wes anderson. you cant go wrong with anything there (that might make me a hipster of some kind). even moonrise kingdom is good even though on paper its sounded wank. ive not seen the one about the dogs yet though. im have trouble maintaining my focus on films these days for reasons so i have nothing particularly new to recommend. AMassiveGay (talk) 11:43, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
- Probably not. My top 5, if I have to rattle them off, in no particular order are 'I <3 Huckabees', 'Rushmore', 'The Great Waldo Pepper', 'Grave of the Fireflies', and 'Parasite' I mean, my top five is always open. I watched 'Suspiria' in Russian, it was very cool, juxtaposing niche social/work demands and body horror. I watched the 'Made in Abyss' anime movies, very cool, juxtaposing chibi characters and gross societal demands with some body horror. I watched Saw 2, alright, juxtapose moral dilemma with body horror. I watched Saw 3... I liked the new Mortal Kombat movie for what it was, but it was nothing special save for the final fight scene which rocked, but also was confusing for reasons I won't spoil, is that fair? Feel free to name a recent movie release that I should watch. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 02:14, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
Special announcement[edit]
My birthday was yesterday. Happy birthday to me I guess. Roman Sionis tends to be inactive during summer 17:20, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
- Happy birthday! GeeJayK (talk) 17:48, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
- lame. its my birthday next monday and i gets a bank holiday just for me. thats how you do birthdays AMassiveGay (talk) 18:18, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
- Celebrating your birthday as a holiday? Like in LaVeyan Satanism? GeeJayK (talk) 18:28, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
- not nex monday, the one after. and everyone gets a bank holiday on my birthday AMassiveGay (talk) 18:36, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
- officially its labour day, but thats just to stop folk getting jealous, but we all know its in my honour. people do get well jel AMassiveGay (talk) 18:39, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
- not nex monday, the one after. and everyone gets a bank holiday on my birthday AMassiveGay (talk) 18:36, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
- Celebrating your birthday as a holiday? Like in LaVeyan Satanism? GeeJayK (talk) 18:28, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
- lame. its my birthday next monday and i gets a bank holiday just for me. thats how you do birthdays AMassiveGay (talk) 18:18, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
- You and I share a birthday. Happy arbitrary completions of planetary orbit to you. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me
- Happy belated birthday. --Possible KGB Spy (Eyes Shift) (talk) 01:05, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
Brilliant article I saw about prayer studies[edit]
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2802370/ Mackyboy123 (talk) 16:36, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- On talk pages, please sign your comments using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking on the sign button: on the toolbar above the edit panel. You can also indent successive talk page comments using one more colon (:) for each line. Thank you. Christopher (talk) 16:03, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- Disguising "But what if it's a flameless invisible dragon in my garage" pseudo-philosophy as a meta-analysis in a major journal by happening to include some analysis of other papers is a nice touch. The discussion barely touches the data, and spends a lot of time talking about absolutely nothing.
“”1. It could be difficult, if not impossible, to measure all the independent and confounding variables that are important in such research.
|
- Oh you think? Man if only medical had faced a similar problem for centuries for all the complexities of the human body, and had devised some kind of system of randomized controls that allow us to examine the statistical effects of some specific intervention epidemiologically without necessarily having a fully reductive model of all possible interactions. Sadly, that has never come up before and the "blind, placebo controlled randomized trial" must only be the ideal of a philosopher.
“”2. How might one define what is an acceptable response to prayer? Healing can be partial or complete. It can be psychological or physical. It can be abstract or concrete. Confounding the picture, statistically significant improvement can be identified only if the same outcome measure is improved in a sufficiently large number of experimental relative to control patients, but why should God decide to select any one outcome measure over the rest? And if different outcome measures improve in different experimental patients in response to prayer, there is no way in which the improvement can be statistically detected.
|
- Surely, surely, we must consider killing the patient an equally good outcome to saving them. "Saving lives" has no business is a medical journal. What nonsense! Certainly the supposed beneficiaries of prayer never make specific claims about how their outcome was affected[sic]. Nope.
- The whole thing is a frustrating Gish Gallop. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 20:54, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
Today in 4/20...[edit]
Weed stocks are skyrocketing, and a friend of mine is so high that I have to type for him. Anyways, I wonder if there is any fallacious argument you've heard. I want to make sure that no one on RW uses a bad argument in discourse, and I should know, as I have done that a lot.— Jeh2ow Damn son! 16:40, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- its actually 20/4. no such 20th month. AMassiveGay (talk) 18:43, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- I think Americans get to use their own date format for their silly urban drug legends. :) PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 19:23, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
Thumbnail for a project in the works[edit]
Might take a while for the video to be made but do tell me what you think of the thumbnail. I call my scenario: Agimi i Apokalipsit EAS. --Possible KGB Spy (Eyes Shift) (talk) 23:10, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- Too hard to read. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 00:14, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
- Can you outline the text, it looks shadowed. I've seen MS Paint before. What if you MS Painted the text, kept the... super dark but also colorful screenshot, no you don't do that in your videos. Lasso a brighter text onto that, but you gotta be kidding. Bright text on darker background, you can't have lights brighter than your text right behind your text, the problem is there's no saving that background. Do something else. Even if it's just emergency flat blue as the entire background and white text, like your computer gives when it crashes, do something else. You really can't work with that background unless the text is bigger, brighter, and uninterrupted by it. And you don't have to match the title with the thumbnail. Maybe put the spookiest line in the thumbnail, instead of the title of the video. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 04:54, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
I Successfully Launched My First Javascript Incorporation Today[edit]
First off, this is very small beans. Secondly, I assume it's a total hack job, I have never used Javascript before. My last coding experience was VisualBasic. But I'm proud of myself and I'm bustin. Last week I decided "You know what, it's slow, I'm going to make my job easier when it's outrageously busy." I took a form that is usually hell to manually create but only comes up once every few months. And I used NitroPro (not sponsored, it bugged out when I didn't custom script and loaded it in Adobe), a PDF program, to create a bunch of text fields with the sole purpose of making it simple enough that if all the text fields are filled out, anyone can confidently do it without my help.
Then I was like "I wonder if I can automate the current date to just show up and be in non-American." You know, 20-APR-2021, non-American, that's what we call it. That's kind of a thing that trips up customs clearance once or twice a year, and I'd rather not try to teach that. So I looked it up, and there was javascript code, and I could custom code the text field to do that. So I said "Shit, if I can code that, what else can I code in?" So any quiet time I got, I started googling and tinkering, to create not just a form to fill out, but a form that does all the things I make mistakes on if I'm rushed or dumb. When new lines appear, license and tariff codes automatically populate, and cost/total cost automatically calculate. The trick was to get all that stuff to disappear if a line is removed. It's not done, but I finally made it practically functional yesterday, and I don't believe it either, but today I actually had to use it.
I got an email from UPS requesting clearance info. It's kind of a common problem when we ship to US territories, principalities, military sites, etc. Our system treats it as domestic but it still needs the export documents. A new guy just shipped a box to Puerto Rico like it was normal, it should have had an international marking on it and it didn't, whatever, mistakes happen.
Here's the status on the tracking number, and scribed by me
"04/20/2021 - 2:25 P.M. Louisville, KY, United States UPS initiated contact with the sender to obtain clearance information. Once received, UPS will submit for clearance. / The information requested has been obtained and the hold has been resolved."
The form I pieced together auto populated date, total value per item at quantity, tariff codes, license codes and total cost for shipment. And it didn't print anything in the fields that are primed to auto populate. IT'S ALIVE! UPS sent me some .doc to fill out, just in case I didn't have an invoice, I'M THE MONSTER MUAHAHAHA! It still needs a ton of work that is way above my head. But a successful first venture. The odds I'll get to try it practically in the next 6 months are low. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 01:58, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
Well...[edit]
...yesterday was fun. we've not had so much interesting news in one day since covid. it was kinda exciting AMassiveGay (talk) 07:17, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
- Was thinking something similar.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 07:29, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
Soon I shall get the Mark of the Beast or its Autism or Fetal Tissue or something.......conspiracy theorists lack consistency[edit]
This Wednesday I will be getting my first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine as will my mom and brothers. I am also managing to keep my clinical paranoia in check.
As for conspiracy theorists, can't that pick a single conspiracy and stick with it? These conspiracies contradict each other. --Possible KGB Spy (Eyes Shift) (talk) 19:46, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- Some way, somehow, nobody knows how exactly, but vaccines ARE evil. Don't ask how, my child, they just are, and that's all that matters. Aaronmichael5 22:53, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- Man, I really wish I didn't start the vaccination process. I now upload my masturbation habits to Bill Gates every 30 seconds and I have contracted double autism. Is there a way I can avoid triple autism? Rockford the Roe boop my snootpraise Oscar Wilde 22:59, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- Lucky you. I was waiting, waiting and waiting for the vaccine, and then somehow ended up with the virus despite not going out for the whole week prior. I'll still take the vaccine after my quarantine, though. MeowPurr
It seems to me that the lack of consistency and lack of a coherently explained motive is one of the key identifiers of conspiracy theories. Moon landing and flat Earth conspiracies are the same as Covid ones. This lack of consistency and lack of clear motive demonstrates that the belief itself is more important than any purported "supporting evidence".Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 09:35, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
- Conspiracy theories, being irrational, are more like flavors, or aromas, one just likes them. There's no thought behind them. They are like free radicals in chemistry, promiscuously attaching themselves to the latent thoughts of the unkempt mind. Ariel31459 (talk) 16:25, 12 April 2021 (UTC).
- Yeah, once you start talking to Beasters and you bring up why there's any need to have someone be voluntarily marked and tracked with a microchip or forehead barcode when you're already involuntarily marked and trackable via your fingerprints, DNA, retinas, and online search habits, they gallop right over to some distantly related point - the possibility that their whole-cloth 'enemy' might not behave exactly as they believe never enters their minds. Semipenultimate (talk) 16:27, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
- I mean, a lot of these people(and somewhere in the range of hundreds of millions to billions of non-conspiracists) also believe that salvation literally comes in the form of little cookies you eat once a week. Making the leap from innocuous commonplace object to divine power of universal significance is apparently quite easy. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 16:35, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
- I think it's fucking weird that it doesn't cost anything. You go, you walk through the line, you get stuck with a needle, and nobody asks you what your payment method is. Very strange. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 05:41, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- You should move to any European Union country. Paying would feel odd.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 08:27, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- Many good points being made about that aspect, how all of our medical experiences could be like this - you schedule, you get your care, and you don't shit yourself worrying about a $10,000 charge because an out-of-system doctor at your in-system nodded affirmatively to someone else. Semipenultimate (talk) 15:49, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- You should move to any European Union country. Paying would feel odd.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 08:27, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- I think it's fucking weird that it doesn't cost anything. You go, you walk through the line, you get stuck with a needle, and nobody asks you what your payment method is. Very strange. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 05:41, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- I mean, a lot of these people(and somewhere in the range of hundreds of millions to billions of non-conspiracists) also believe that salvation literally comes in the form of little cookies you eat once a week. Making the leap from innocuous commonplace object to divine power of universal significance is apparently quite easy. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 16:35, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
- Yeah, once you start talking to Beasters and you bring up why there's any need to have someone be voluntarily marked and tracked with a microchip or forehead barcode when you're already involuntarily marked and trackable via your fingerprints, DNA, retinas, and online search habits, they gallop right over to some distantly related point - the possibility that their whole-cloth 'enemy' might not behave exactly as they believe never enters their minds. Semipenultimate (talk) 16:27, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
Got my first COVID vaccine dose, oh I mean "Mark of the Beast"[edit]
Other than a few minor side effects I am doing good. No these are not killing over, becoming sterile, getting microchipped, getting poisoned, my dick falling off, turning into a zombie, turning into a werewolf or mutating into some freakish mutant monster. --Possible KGB Spy (Eyes Shift) (talk) 18:20, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- Got mine yesterday. Feeling a little groggy, no more than a minor hangover. Scheduled my second dose, and got invited to a teammates bachelor party. It's 14 days after my second dose. I will be unleashed!-RipCityLiberal (talk) 17:15, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- I got my first MOTB as well; while for a few hours after I put my trust behind satanic science rather than the nebulous "plan" of some sky tyrant my nose felt a bit runny, now it feels so damn good now that I have those little NWO nanochips circulating through my blood. And I already have autism (which I totally got from my first flu and measles vaccines and totally not because it runs in my dad's side of the family and is a dominant gene) so it didn't matter to me at all. --Goatspeed. Happy Holidays!🎄CircularRasoning🎄Prototype lab 14:17, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
Jesus[edit]
My best friend was shot and killed by police. I don't know what to do, and I probably won't be active here for at least a month. Just thought you all should know. IveBeenFrank (talk) 10:47, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- Words fail me. Wishing you and your friend's loved ones all the best at this terrible time. Spud (talk) 13:03, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- That's terrible, Frank. I don't even know what to say other than I'm sorry. GeeJayK (talk) 14:18, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- That is pretty shocking. It's really hard to respond. I'm very sorry this has happened to you.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 14:28, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- I'm not shocked, but I'm outraged. Something's gotta give on this killing without trial shit. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 14:38, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- Shit, man, my condolences. This is so terrible. --It's-a me, 🎄LeftyGreenMario!🎄 15:15, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- My condolences to you and your friend's family. Bongolian (talk) 17:15, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- Truly tragic.Monstrous pigs. Wonder what their excuse is? --Possible KGB Spy (Eyes Shift) (talk) 18:22, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- My condolences to you and your friend's family. Bongolian (talk) 17:15, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- Shit, man, my condolences. This is so terrible. --It's-a me,
- I'm not shocked, but I'm outraged. Something's gotta give on this killing without trial shit. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 14:38, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- That is pretty shocking. It's really hard to respond. I'm very sorry this has happened to you.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 14:28, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- That's terrible, Frank. I don't even know what to say other than I'm sorry. GeeJayK (talk) 14:18, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- Therapist or counselor, ASAP. Do not wait for this sort of thing, talk with someone. CorSock (talk) 20:51, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- Also, don't mean to pry too much, plus it might be an issue because Doxxing, but was it anyone that made the news lately? CorruptUser 21:44, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- Well, I don't wanna be that guy, but I think everyone here was thinking the same thing. We just didn't have the courage to ask. GeeJayK (talk) 22:16, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- Well, all the major news networks wrote an article about it, but you'd have to do some digging to find them. But since this was the only police shooting today (or so I hope), if you do find the story, or even a story you think is it, please don't share it around here. I don't think any of you would do that, but I just want to avoid any doxxing about it. Sometime later when I've fully processed it I could probably talk more/be fine with sharing it, but not now. Thanks to everyone for all the support, it really means a lot right now. IveBeenFrank (talk) 23:03, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- I'll pray for you and your friend. I'm so sorry about what happened. Roman Sionis tends to be inactive during summer 20:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- That is terrible to hear, Frank - my heartfelt condolences. MeowPurr 16:18, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- That's absolutely horrid. May your friend live forever in your heart. Which was it- was your friend male, mentally handicapped, and/or a person of color? Those idiots (the cops, to clarify) really need to get over themselves already. --Goatspeed. Happy Holidays!🎄CircularRasoning🎄Prototype lab 14:27, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
- That's absolutely horrid. May your friend live forever in your heart. Which was it- was your friend male, mentally handicapped, and/or a person of color? Those idiots (the cops, to clarify) really need to get over themselves already. --Goatspeed. Happy Holidays!🎄CircularR
- That is terrible to hear, Frank - my heartfelt condolences. MeowPurr 16:18, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- I'll pray for you and your friend. I'm so sorry about what happened. Roman Sionis tends to be inactive during summer 20:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- Well, all the major news networks wrote an article about it, but you'd have to do some digging to find them. But since this was the only police shooting today (or so I hope), if you do find the story, or even a story you think is it, please don't share it around here. I don't think any of you would do that, but I just want to avoid any doxxing about it. Sometime later when I've fully processed it I could probably talk more/be fine with sharing it, but not now. Thanks to everyone for all the support, it really means a lot right now. IveBeenFrank (talk) 23:03, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- Well, I don't wanna be that guy, but I think everyone here was thinking the same thing. We just didn't have the courage to ask. GeeJayK (talk) 22:16, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- Also, don't mean to pry too much, plus it might be an issue because Doxxing, but was it anyone that made the news lately? CorruptUser 21:44, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
European Super League[edit]
For those not sport inclined, here is the perspective from the States.[37][38][39] Weirdly it seems to have united Europeans across the political spectrum against it. It is almost certainly the Americanization of competition, where the elite clubs play each other with billions on the line, and contribute mere millions back into their national organizations.-RipCityLiberal (talk) 22:41, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
- its entirely about money. there is not other reason for it to exist. elite clubs already play each other in the champion league but they have to qualify for that one. AMassiveGay (talk) 07:22, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- of the teams signed up, 6 are from the uk, 3 italy, and 3 from spain. no german teams. no french. hardly much super about such a league. hope it dies a death. AMassiveGay (talk) 07:56, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- they are not even the best (current success) teams in their respective leagues, premier league at least. they are simply the richest and owned by mostly americans seems. AMassiveGay (talk) 08:06, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- i am told german teams are 51% owned by their fans, by law. thats how it should be done AMassiveGay (talk) 08:08, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- im not even a football fan and its pissed me offAMassiveGay (talk) 08:09, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- It is really already over the top. Football tickets are already ridiculously expensive (not to mention updating kit every few years). It is even more ludicrously expensive for families to go to a few games (let alone season subscriptions) even with those few teams who have youth concessions. A super league will just make getting tickets a total luxury which is sort of sickening considering they always play up the "family" aspect of football. ShabiDOO 09:00, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- Agree with Shabi, football has been on this sickening path for a long time and now it seems to have reached its absurd conclusion. But this seems to be the case for a lot of sports nowadays: becoming more and more superficial and consumer driven, loosing any sense of what made them fun in the first place. I'm reminded of this video-essay by David Foster Wallace The Oscars which pretty much sums up the irony we have to live with constantly now. LeucippusTalk 13:42, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- It is really already over the top. Football tickets are already ridiculously expensive (not to mention updating kit every few years). It is even more ludicrously expensive for families to go to a few games (let alone season subscriptions) even with those few teams who have youth concessions. A super league will just make getting tickets a total luxury which is sort of sickening considering they always play up the "family" aspect of football. ShabiDOO 09:00, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- im not even a football fan and its pissed me offAMassiveGay (talk) 08:09, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- i am told german teams are 51% owned by their fans, by law. thats how it should be done AMassiveGay (talk) 08:08, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- they are not even the best (current success) teams in their respective leagues, premier league at least. they are simply the richest and owned by mostly americans seems. AMassiveGay (talk) 08:06, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- of the teams signed up, 6 are from the uk, 3 italy, and 3 from spain. no german teams. no french. hardly much super about such a league. hope it dies a death. AMassiveGay (talk) 07:56, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
The players, whose teams play in the Super League will also get punished: They aren‘t able to play for their country. Kevs Ping! 14:58, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- thats the threat. its by no means certain. AMassiveGay (talk) 15:00, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- This is awful. Fooball/soccor is not F1 or NBA. GeeJayK (talk) 15:03, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, it‘s a very hard punishment, but almost all fans oppose the Super League, even those who support these Clubs. Kevs Ping! 15:41, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- you are forgetting lawyers and legal action for any such punishment AMassiveGay (talk) 15:55, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- and players are under contract AMassiveGay (talk) 15:59, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- you are forgetting lawyers and legal action for any such punishment AMassiveGay (talk) 15:55, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, it‘s a very hard punishment, but almost all fans oppose the Super League, even those who support these Clubs. Kevs Ping! 15:41, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- This is awful. Fooball/soccor is not F1 or NBA. GeeJayK (talk) 15:03, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- This is a terrible idea. It punishes the clubs, players, and fans for wanting to enjoy soccer (okay, fine. Football). This would never fly.— Jeh2ow Damn son! 16:51, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- it would likely mean a lot of players would transfer to other teams. it wouldnt hurt fans at all just the avaricious clubs and there owners in the esl.
- though chelsea are pulling out. manchester city is having second thoughts. its dead in the water AMassiveGay (talk) 18:38, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- man city already out i should say. AMassiveGay (talk) 18:44, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- And now Athletico and Barcelona. It‘s getting in the right direction. Kevs Ping! 18:48, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- its dead. i hope investors from jp morgan lose their shirts, but im not hopeful. AMassiveGay (talk) 19:05, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- Glazer and co. might need to take a GCSE business primer after this debacle, and throw in a Voight-Kampf test for good measure. LeucippusTalk 19:07, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- Well, even Manchester United is planning to leave. Kevs Ping! 19:12, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- Hubris + avarice is a helluva drug. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 19:11, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- Glazer and co. might need to take a GCSE business primer after this debacle, and throw in a Voight-Kampf test for good measure. LeucippusTalk 19:07, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- its dead. i hope investors from jp morgan lose their shirts, but im not hopeful. AMassiveGay (talk) 19:05, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- And now Athletico and Barcelona. It‘s getting in the right direction. Kevs Ping! 18:48, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- man city already out i should say. AMassiveGay (talk) 18:44, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
im curious about how americans think about all this considering their sports are essentially run like the esl would have in that no one gets relegated or promoted and the same clubs play each season after season regardless of perfomance? AMassiveGay (talk) 19:12, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- Have to remember, in the US we have the NCAA. It essentially functions as our lower tier, and is extremely exploitative.-RipCityLiberal (talk) 19:33, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- just the 1 tier? the premier league has divisions 1, 2, and the national league under it, and then more regional leagues AMassiveGay (talk) 19:37, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- we dont have the equivalent of college sports here. the boat race is the only student sport that has any kind of following and thats just 2 teams once a year. AMassiveGay (talk) 19:40, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- The NCAA has three divisions (plus a few subdivisions for certain sports). It's not really like the European style promotion and relegation systems, though, the divisions are based on the size of the college athletic department (how many athletic programs they have, average attendance, etc.). Professional American sports are very much monopolies run with tight control at the top; mid sized cities not profitable enough for a big team tend to get "minor league" developmental teams run by the major leagues. (It wasn't always this way, as the NFL team Green Bay Packers, founded in 1919, hints at.) PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 21:15, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- The development leagues are the real opportunity to create a more egalitarian system, similar to the Football Pyramid, but the NCAA system would need to collapse. American Football honestly is the only system I cannot imagine where such a system would be successful, primarily because of the brutality of the sport.-RipCityLiberal (talk) 23:26, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- The NCAA has three divisions (plus a few subdivisions for certain sports). It's not really like the European style promotion and relegation systems, though, the divisions are based on the size of the college athletic department (how many athletic programs they have, average attendance, etc.). Professional American sports are very much monopolies run with tight control at the top; mid sized cities not profitable enough for a big team tend to get "minor league" developmental teams run by the major leagues. (It wasn't always this way, as the NFL team Green Bay Packers, founded in 1919, hints at.) PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 21:15, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- we dont have the equivalent of college sports here. the boat race is the only student sport that has any kind of following and thats just 2 teams once a year. AMassiveGay (talk) 19:40, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- just the 1 tier? the premier league has divisions 1, 2, and the national league under it, and then more regional leagues AMassiveGay (talk) 19:37, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
And now Arsenal and Tottenham. All English clubs are no longer in the super league. Kevs Ping! 05:56, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
- It's suspended. Finally. Kevs Ping! 06:04, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
- yeh, tottenham. elite clubs my arse AMassiveGay (talk) 07:20, 21 April 2021 (UTC)