RationalWiki:Saloon bar

Welcome, BoN
This is a place for general chit-chat about virtually anything that doesn't fit anywhere else.
For previous conversations, see the automagic barchives.

edit

Looks like TRACS has a newly accredited member

https://www.cgsot.edu

California Graduate School of Theology has received full national accreditation. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 16:05, 10 December 2018 (UTC) "The study of theology, as it stands in Christian churches, is the study of nothing; it is founded on nothing; it rests on no principles; it proceeds by no authorities; it has no data; it can demonstrate nothing; and it admits of no conclusion. Not anything can be studied as a science, without our being in possession of the principles upon which it is founded; and as this is the case with Christian theology, it is therefore the study of nothing." --Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason Phantom666 (talk) 15:08, 11 December 2018 (UTC)Phantom666

Breath taking photo of Jupiter by Juno mission

in phase

and a close up of a storm (the storms being about the size of our moon each)

—^{— Unsigned, by: Shabidoo / talk / contribs}

Wow, imagine a marble run with that. Willthenut (talk) 23:19, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Does value exist?

I read something in a Buddhist magazine called Lion's Roar about how nothing is "worth it" because value is just some imaginary metric that we use to judge the world around us and that it doesn't really exist. The response to the "if its not worth it then why do it" was something along the lines of "the marvel of your being" which doesn't really answer the question at all (then again expecting it would was hoping too much).

But does Value actually exist though.Machina (talk) 03:33, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

@Machina To be clear, are you asking about intrinsic or assigned value? ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 04:24, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

"The marvel of your being" is a value yet it says "nothing is worth it because value is just..." so, either there is some greater insight there and we don't have enough text/context or you didn't share enough text/context with us, or, as is often the case in many Bhuddist texts, there is an unresolved conflict or it's another wishy washy narrative with some insight and a lot of conceptual babble. ShabiDOO 12:07, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

To put it succinctly - what is the 'value' in contributing to RW? Anna Livia (talk) 12:09, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

I guess it's a matter of both, the way the put it was that value is just something imaginary that we assign to things. There wasn't much context to that, what you see it the whole of it. Made no sense to me since it didn't answer the question. It's weird how they mix stuff like that in the magazine with activism, advocating for compassion and kindness, and promoting Art and being an artist.Machina (talk) 19:44, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

There is an obvious contradiction in saying nothing has value: the statement "nothing has value" has no value to me. The trap you have fallen into involves the assumption that the conclusion that you feel forced into has very negative implications. Your own system of values has put you in that place.Ariel31459 (talk) 17:47, 17 December 2018 (UTC).

@Ariel31459@Machina There is no such thing as intrinsic value. This is because value is based on the wants, needs, and desires of the observer who assigns said value. It is also the main reason I asked my first question. Whenever the subject(s) of meaning, value, and/or purpose comes up I am required to define terms in order to be clear about what I'm referring to. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 23:07, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Yes. Perhaps intrinsic value is a claim of generally agreed upon high value, such as the intrinsic value of rare metals.Ariel31459 (talk) 23:37, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

But nothing having value is a pretty grim conclusion. It would lead to paralysis.Machina (talk) 00:22, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

@Machina It appears that I have lost you. inherent value, for anything, does not exist. We assign value to things that we view as useful, special, and worthwhile. Again, this goes back to how the human brain defines value, and why. And on to the whole "grim conclusion" bit. So what? I assign value to life because it is fleeting, to video games and books because they make me feel emotionally fulfilled, to learning because it helps me grow, and to role models because of the work that went into their achievements. So what if there's no greater meaning or value, or if it'll all turn to dust in the end? So what if there's nothing and no one running the freak show we call reality? Why are these things needed? What purpose do they serve? what is their value? ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 00:35, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

You don't get what I am saying. That value according to them is just some imaginary measure we use to judge and that it doesn't really exist.Machina (talk) 02:04, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

@Machina Then as far as I can tell they don't know what they're talking about. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 02:50, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Value is determined by how many hours (and by extension days. weeks, years, etc.) of your labor you are willing to give to get the things you want. And money, as a standard unit of measure, need'nt even factor in. A farmer in a remote region, or Lapland reindeer herder, the value of their crop or herd is determined by the amount of effort they put into it to feed themselves. Money is only for comparative value of equal amounts of labor in different employments. nobs ^{piss in my ear} 03:48, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

@RobSmith Machina is talking about value in the abstract, i.e. in general. Lay off the economic babble. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 13:42, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

@GrammarCommie I don't think he cares to, though. I think that's his honest view on value. But how do we value that opinion? On the amount of work it took him to come up with? On the amount of time it took him to write, on how much time we spend considering it? I think nobs is actually on point here. Especially in relation to Buddhist values. And hey, I'm a nihilist, so give me my due "your positions are already invalid" ribbing. I mean, "money is only for comparative value of equal amounts of labor in different employments." How abstract does a guy need to get?

My point is, everything is an abstraction, and you can't deny the things that make the most sense to you are based on perceptions and interpretations. Where Buddhism falters, as opposed to a secular interpretation of this idea, is the promise that it is BETTER to free yourself from anything other than Buddhist worldviews. But you can apply this to any number of things, and what do you get? You get an interpretation of value, most commonly economic, but undeniably an interpretation. I think our good friend nobs was applying this method in good faith, and even if he won't express it outside of who gets paid for what. I mean, he's talkin reality, surgeons and taxi drivers have different realities.

So, while it seems obtuse to move the argument to wages, I think nobs means to point out the fact that we do assign value, and it is fairly abstract, which means we might be wrong about how we currently do it! To aspire for riches and helping people is a good route to being a snake-oil salesman. To refuse to be anything other than self-reliant under the wrong circumstances can lead to homelessness. Buddhism isn't a lens with which we can consider these eventualities. Neither is "doing your own thing to reach your own values." Correct me if I'm interpreting this wrong. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 06:01, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Actually, this is the moral objection to a guaranteed income. Since the unit of measure - money - has no cost to the recipient in time and trouble, it has no value. nobs ^{piss in my ear} 09:18, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Oh, so if we gave people money, they wouldn't know what it meant so they wouldn't know how to spend it to the proper extent of its value? I don't think this is a moral argument. I mean, is it immoral to give a homeless person food and shelter even if they're too mentally challenged to turn that into a net gain for society? Is there anyone who is homeless who could create a net gain for society with the benefit of minimal housing and food that they currently don't have access to? I recognize that this isn't the same as putting the money in the hands of the homeless person, but the moral argument doesn't make a lot of sense, because usually making a moral decision implies the risk of losing what you offer for no reason other than risking it and promises no return. So, if the ideology is 'nobody gets to have anything until they understand the value of it,' what are the odds a trust fund baby knows the value of a dollar better than somebody who works 60 hours to feed their kids and pay rent? I mean, can we extrapolate to say nobs is against inheritance and pro "death-tax?" Gol Sarnitt (talk) 07:16, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Of coarse this question would come up. What's ths moral difference between (A) a worker who spends their whole paycheck on dope, say $500, and (B) a person who spends their entire disability check on dope, say $500, and (C) a person who breaks into your car and steals something worth $500 to trade for dope and does $1000 in damage doing so? Which person understands the value of $500? nobs ^{piss in my ear} 07:31, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

they would all understand the value of $500. the situations presented generally implies that that these folk would be living hand to mouth coupled with substance issues. if anyone understands the value of $500, its these people. AMassiveGay (talk) 08:09, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

That's I think, the point. The value of a dollar is immutable, and that value matters more to a person who lives dollar to dollar. To equalize the situation by handing out, say 100 dollars a month can not change the value of a dollar. The value of a dollar as interpreted by the person who holds it is subjective, but a dollar is legal tender. A gold coin is not legal tender. Are you worried about dope prices going up"? How do you justify your own value, or the things you value? If you try to do it objectively, somebody will tell you it's not worth the price.Gol Sarnitt (talk) 09:44, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

DEATH TO ALL THAT IS HOLY!!!

WE WILL ROOT OUT AND SLAY THE HOLY, SLAY THE RIGHTEOUS, SLAY THE FAITHFUL! MAY THE MINIONS OF THE FLYING SPAGHETTI MONSTER FOREVER CRUSH THE HORDES OF CHRISTIAN WANNA-BELIEVERS! DEATH TO THE CHRIST! DEATH TO THE CHURCH! ALL WILL BOW BEFORE THE FSM! REPENT, CHRISTIANS! REPENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111!!!!!!! — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 00:18, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Errr... I'm not Christian or Pastafarian... We cool? Gol Sarnitt (talk) 02:46, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

You smoking crack dude? --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 16:04, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

I prefer booze. — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 20:45, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

I have never had any luck smoking booze. It only makes the rolling papers soggy, and won't light unless Alton Brown is there.Kencolt (talk) 21:57, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

I didn't realize you can smoke booze. For some reason I`m seeing pigs flying right outside my window... — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 20:33, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Ich glaube mein Schwein pfeift. nobs ^{piss in my ear} 07:44, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Alabama police department blames Satan for spike in homocides

Because why do your job when you can just blame Satan for it? 𝔊𝔬𝔞𝔱-𝔈𝔪𝔭𝔢𝔯𝔬𝔯 𝔅𝔦𝔤𝔰 (𝔴𝔬𝔯𝔡𝔰 𝔬𝔣 𝔴𝔦𝔰𝔡𝔬𝔪/𝔞𝔠𝔥𝔦𝔢𝔳𝔢𝔪𝔢𝔫𝔱𝔰) 02:53, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Wingnuts act like wingnuts. In other news, water is wet. RoninMacbeth (talk) 03:52, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

When your population is comparable to my high school... Like, it probably is a semi-effective shaming technique. But for a town this small to take to Twitter to try and reach the youth by tweeting... I dunno, I'm mixed in my opinion. I mean it's way stupid, but where do you source an effective sheriff and police force for this? We're worried about hall monitors here. Which is not to delegitimize the complaint. The complaint is legit. Maybe it's just good that they reared the Twitter head and got a Twitter smack-down for now.Gol Sarnitt (talk) 04:02, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

The police department is supposed to be solving and dealing with crime. Is our tax dollars going to incompetent jackals who cry about Satan? How sad. The police should be doing their jobs. If not, fire them. They are not getting paid to be conspiracy theorists. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 16:08, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

This is also how you persuade teenagers to kill cats and write graffiti. Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱs. 16:18, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

@Rationalzombie94 People will do anything to not do any work and still make a quick buck. — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 08:29, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Looks like these cops should stop getting a paycheck until they do their jobs. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 14:38, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

So if it's not Satan, whodunnit? nobs ^{piss in my ear} 07:57, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Jesus did it. — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 12:37, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

How about making the police do their fucking jobs

Sounds like a good plan instead of blaming Satan. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 18:05, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

This is America. Police are for shooting stuff. ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 21:42, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Well, police officers are paid to uphold the law not brutality or spewing paranoid crap. Replace the incompetent bureaucrats with people who can do what the actual job entails. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 18:44, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

That's other countries. This is america. ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 19:23, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

I get it, I really do. I wish every cop was a good cop. I wish every police department was a good police department. Would you suspend all police in a tiny Alabama town? I mean... you probably could, but only fascism would make that a priority. This is a cultural problem without a solution. You can't replace this police force, unless you want to go find a crack force who wants to sign up and patrol a society they don't understand with rules they don't get. For a southern town, are you kidding me? Sorry, not trying to be mean. Tweet shows a poor understanding of the church and state separation. But take a minute and look at where the tweet came from before you go sending it on. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 06:45, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Sounds like I'm Blue Lives Matter over here. I'm full Black Lives Matter, police lethal force gets used on blacks like there aren't repercussions. There are still people thinking there are ghosts and aliens. We have video footage of cops killing people for no reason. The police are trying to do they're job. Fuck em if they can't, but we can start somewhere. 06:54, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Well it is not like blaming Satan is helpful either. Police brutality is also a problem. We have one group of cops who use unnecessary force and another group who is too lazy to actually investigate crime then blame Satan as an escape hatch for their laziness. Talk about being stuck between a rock and a hard place. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 18:27, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

I'd agree with you on that. I don't think effective policing starts with prayer or ends with a bullet. I'm sure there are plenty of analogues to other police departments, and I'm sure there are plenty of officers and sheriffs and commissioners who do believe starting each shift with prayer is a top priority. I mean, if it matters to football players and coaches in these towns, it probably matters just as much to their police departments. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 07:37, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

homocide

is a hate crime. just saying AMassiveGay (talk) 08:22, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

— Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 08:34, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

of course its amusement at a typo that get the dftt treatment AMassiveGay (talk) 12:20, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

— Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 12:31, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

very unsure on your criteria for troll here AMassiveGay (talk) 13:58, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

It's not that hard to figure out. Think for a moment, sir, think! — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 14:00, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

nope, it eludes me AMassiveGay (talk) 14:02, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

<facepalm> Seriously? It was a troll move to create this entire subsection in the first place, it adds nothing of value and only serves to add filler. — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 14:03, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

'it adds nothing of value and only serves to add filler.' - it was amusing though, at least to me. and there is 'DEATH TO ALL THAT IS HOLY!!!' if we are talking of adding nothing but filler AMassiveGay (talk) 14:11, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Checkmate, you win. — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 17:58, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Nukes

Should be used more often. — Dysk (contribs) 15:05, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Because millions of people would want to deal with nuclear fallout. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 15:28, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

That is an astute observation, in fact, support for nuclear annihilation is at an all time high right now, why do you think Trump got elected in the first place? "I`m gonna bomb the shit out of 'em." — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 17:59, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Who breaks the news?

Look, I've been saying this whole thing is fluff since the beginning. I capitulate to a long-time poster for a second because I'm sick of telling people they're wrong/not wrong and this is what happens? Sources [1] [2][3] [4] To sound properly like a Oppian, it were murders most foul. I'm not going to solve five homicides, and I'm not going to be super defensive of cops who wanna tweet that satan probably made the murders. But I'm also not that defensive of Opp Alabama, the five homicides are not public record, who knows, maybe we should just be a clown factory. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 08:22, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

The Cops had access to insider knowledge from Hell itself, and it isn't inconceivable that Satan himself provided the cops the information they needed in return for some eventual kickbacks. — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 14:34, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Street preachers

Having gone past one today (usual Jesus guff) - do they ever actually convert anybody?

Those people who actually #do something# in the name of their faith (even if it is something as minor as 'consciously being polite to people'/arranging the church flowers and similar) are going to leave a better impression. Anna Livia (talk) 20:47, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

@Anna Livia Surprisingly, yes. Or so some born again Christians claim. I personally have never met a street preacher, which given my attitude towards religion might be a good thing, otherwise one might hear of a man faking conversion, complete with holy spirit drama and speaking in tongues. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 21:26, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

I understand that in previous times some locals in places where the missionaries went to convert with the help of gifts would, quite sensibly, allow themselves to be repeatedly 'converted.'

From what I have observed such street preachers get totally ignored - but the buskers get a certain amount of loose change. I was curious as to what others had observed.

Making the world even a slightly better place/showing courtesy and goodwill to all is a good thing to do - whatever your system of beliefs/ethics/outlook (and satisfies Pascal's wager as well). Anna Livia (talk) 23:53, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Few years ago there was a guy who walked around town with a sign that proclaimed the world was ending. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 14:54, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

If the Salvation Army lot and the Hare Krishnas are excluded (as not being street preachers) Stanley Green seemingly had slightly more success. Anna Livia (talk) 18:45, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Besides JWs, who put displays with brochures and I've hardly seen people with them (I remember to have asked once them if they gave aways Bibles, no such luck), there're two types, all inmigrants: those who go after individuals, usually just also inmigrants and ignoring everyone else (ie: locals), and those who are preaching screaming.

The latter are ignored and it does not help either they're of the Fundie variety, threatening with the Lake of Fire or that we'll lament not to have heard him when Jesus comes. Panzerfaust (talk) 12:48, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

If you're confused about the bell ringers, the Salvation Army sources them from the homeless. Which is outsourcing panhandling, but these people are earning a building and a bed. Christmas is over and it's "good luck, see ya," for the bell ringers. One I dodged sang the first verse of jingle bells as his go-to. You think that earned him a spot? Why was he so happy to sing, then? You think he's not been told "Christmas is over, try with Wal-Mart"? I don't have a home for the guy. I didn't break change for the Salvation Army either. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 07:39, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

One thing I don't get are those ones who say the world will end at so-and-so a time. I wonder what they do when the world DOESN'T end. Willthenut (talk) 19:41, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Vaccinations are bad!

Look at the evidence! We need to ban vaccinations! AntivaxMom (talk) 22:19, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

— Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 22:21, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

I’ve had 5 kids and didn’t vaccinate any of them. The one that survived turned out fine! AntivaxMom (talk) 22:23, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Methinks that AntivaxMom may be pro vax afterall. Not a troll: "The one that survived ..." Scream!! (talk) 00:02, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Sounds like satire to me. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 14:16, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Exactly. Think I'll remove the 'collapse'. Scream!! (talk) 19:40, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

But this presumes the other children died of preventable illnesses.

On a technicality - are most people (since 1975) vaccinated or inoculated? Anna Livia (talk) 13:31, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

@Anna Livia When reverting a revert of mine, they said measles. Nerd (talk) 16:01, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

The plan for me is if every other chump pays some scam doctor to vaccinate their kids, herd immunity and God's will ought to pan out for mine. I, on the other hand, am clearly taking no risks here, which implies massive gains. Also, has anybody seen the latest powerball payout? It's only a dollar to play, right? I'd like to know whether to drive my drunk ass over to the gas station and pick up my ticket. I mean, if it's less than a hundred million, what's the point? But if it's 100 million, oooh baby, I'm playin to win! Gol Sarnitt (talk) 07:50, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Proof of there not being a self?

https://medium.com/dharma-talk/does-the-self-exist-22a2c3c847bb

It seems like the main argument is that because we apparently lack control over certain faculties of our being that there is no self, otherwise we would have control over it. At best I think this just argues there is no free will, not a non self.Machina (talk) 02:11, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

I know I am not Machina or the authors of the article - therefore the article is wrong. Anna Livia (talk) 10:37, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Are you sure about that?Machina (talk) 19:51, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

I don't suppose so, I knows so. Anna Livia (talk) 13:22, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Lookin for foos and foos. Sorry, that's onomatopoea or a strange point, foos oughta back it up. somebody find foos. No foose? Somebody find foos Gol Sarnitt (talk) 08:07, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

All that is proved is that 'the world' is more complex than 'the theory' (otherwise bees could not fly). Anna Livia (talk) 13:22, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Okay, deep breath. The self can be defined as an entity. You are yourself, I am myself. Let's play back to knowing that I am not Machina or Anna Livia or the author of the article. This, I know. I am not physically or supernaturally connected to any of these other entities in a meaningful way to this conversation. So, I am happy to define myself, but I am also confined to that definition (physically separated and not supernaturally connected). I think the point this article drives home is, what is it about ourselves from which we are physically separated? I think the article presupposes a soul or spirit, which is not great, but it's worth thinking about, because as much as I'd like to say I'm a real grouch in the morning until I've had a cup of coffee, am I the grouch or is the non-caffeinated me the grouch? And if it's a chemical response, at what point do we actively gain or lose self by controlling the chemicals that pump through our brains? It reads like new-age trash, and it probably has to these days Gol Sarnitt (talk) 08:45, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

I mean, they talk about Karma as if it's an active force. First off, it's not real, second, Karma doesn't affect you until your next life. All these dipshits saying Karma is the Golden Rule + the Secret have to realize that every time they stomp a spider or eat a chicken wing, they are actively denying a creature's chance to build karma. Every spider you vacuum up is a soul that could potentially become a human, and you've denied it the proper chance at Karma. I'm honestly so sick of people talking about Karma like it's not religious doctrine, like they've been there. If you're Abrahamic, it's blasphemy. If you're agnostic, you can name your magic spells whatever you want. If you're Hindu or Buddhist and take it seriously, hell, I'm willing to talk to you about it. But it's the modern era, believe whatever you want, I guess! Don't point me to your holy book if you're not gonna read it, though. Sorry, I was trying to save that, but I couldn't.Gol Sarnitt (talk) 10:05, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Skynet is real!

Wikipedia has more: Skynet (satellite). Nerd (talk) 03:45, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

"I am a cybernetic organism, Cyberdyne Systems Model 101." — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 08:20, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Wasn't some US ship named after the Star Trek Enterprise@

Don't worry - Boaty McBoatface will be to the rescue. Anna Livia (talk) 10:40, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

us xhips have been named enterprise since the 1700s AMassiveGay (talk) 10:47, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

@AMassiveGay Yes, indeed. And more will follow. Both the world's first nuclear-power aircraft carrier (CVN-65) and the next Gerald Ford-class supercarrier (CVN-80) have the name USS Enterprise. Enterprise is a really nice name, just like Iowa, Montana, Missouri and so on. Nerd (talk) 17:17, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

— Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 11:32, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

This was a specific case - and there are Real World borrowing of names etc from fiction (Flores hobbits are slightly out of context here). Anna Livia (talk) 12:37, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

probably, but how would you differentiate between the usual enterpises and star trek enterprise? 'we name this ship enterprise - not that enterprise but the other enterpise' and wouldnt the star trek enterpise have been named after the other eterpises anyway? AMassiveGay (talk) 12:36, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

The Star Trek Enterprise was named after the US Navy ship Enterprise, one of many which were in turn named after the British sailing vessel, HMS Enterprise, which they stole off the French anyway. This is alluded to in one of the Next Generation films where they are on a holodeck replica of the original Enterprise. — Dysk (contribs) 20:15, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Christmas hat

Why doesn't the logo-brain have its usual Christmas hat on? Or has RW decided to celebrate according to the Julian Calendar? Anna Livia (talk) 10:27, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

How do you put the hat on though? — Dysk (contribs) 11:37, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Because times change and people move on, and the people who both knew how to do it and wanted to do it are long gone. Avida Dollars^{her again} 15:02, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Would it be possible to have a group of 'seasonal greetings' appearing for a day or two on the Main Page (Happy Equinoxes and Solstices, various New Years, 'The end of the world is not nigh' (when somebody promotes their latest Armageddon-theory) etc? And the login screen could have 'Please select a suitably seasonal Look-at-me username' as a header. Anna Livia (talk) 20:15, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

So like Holydaze on the mainpage? This can be done. Not sure what your festive username idea is exactly, but I can change the login screen text if needed. — Dysk (contribs) 21:52, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Those who provide usernames which they know will get banned within a short time should be persuaded to try something different (and so on 1 April they self-describing themselves). Anna Livia (talk) 11:02, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Put a Menorah on the Judaism page, eh? Willthenut (talk) 23:21, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Esperanto Articles

So I may or may not get to doing this, but i've been studying Esperanto for the past two weeks and was curious if I would be allowed to translate some current articles into Esperanto for practice. I don't want to do this because of some stupid ideological reason why Esperanto is perfect but simply because I feel like it.--Spoony (talk) 12:09, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Sure, why not? — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 12:10, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Go ahead. There are a few Esperanto articles already, including the wonderfully named Esperanto (Esperanto). See Category:Esperanto. Avida Dollars^{her again} 15:06, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

All but two of the articles in Category:Esperanto were created by me. (I cannot claim credit for "Esperanto (Esperanto)".) I've translated one article a month since June. (I did my first Spanish translation here in December. I intend to translate a few more articles into Spanish and French in 2019.) Hopefully, I will have started my January project, translating our new Arthur Conan Doyle article into Esperanto, by this weekend. Spud (talk) 16:21, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ I've been procrastinating on finishing my David Icke EO article for months now.'Legion^{what do you want from me} 01:53, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Then sink your scales into it. — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 18:42, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

More like 2 inch long teeth, unless those white pointy things in reptilian mouths really are scales. 😜 --It's-a me, 🎄LeftyGreenMario!🎄 19:00, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Fangs! — Dysk (contribs) 21:37, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Fuck notability

See why here. — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 12:16, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

i agree, thats why i'm starting a page on the guy who works down the chip shop who swears hes elvis. AMassiveGay (talk) 12:25, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

That's one of the best pieces i've seen in the essayspace in the 4 years I've been here yet you completely destroyed it with one sarcastic quip--Spoony (talk) 14:53, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Did you even read the essay? — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 13:31, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

yes i did. earlier and back when it was first posted. its shite. without some semblance of notability there is no reason not include my elvis friend, (though hes a liar and im not sure about you).

without notability there are many things that are nonsense that would just wither and die without a spotlight being shone on it, without the likes of us poking them with a stick would never be notable. i am convinced this is the case with flat earthers, for example. i dont believe anyone believes the earth is flat save one or two lunatics. the spotlight provided from various internet sources just showed conspiracy theorists a theory to add their list and to contrarians who would argue black is white and white is black. then suddenly its notable. (on that note, clowns arnt scary either. its just a thing that people say)

without notability we just feed into the delusions of random folk with obvious mental health issues and a youtube account, humouring them by 'confirming' their sense of paranoia when we point and laugh at them. without any notability this to me is just outright bullying of the unwell.

it becomes not so much 'dont feed the troll' but leave that lunatic alone - its not victorian times, its no longer acceptable to pay a penny to tour bedlam. but as with dftt i doubt its something we are able to do. AMassiveGay (talk) 14:53, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

@AMassiveGay@Don Juan@Spoony I feel I must both agree and disagree with all of you. While I agree that crank ideas should be fought, we should avoid making the problem worse via the Streisand effect, wherein we inadvertently make a crank seem more interesting than they already are. Thusly, there must be some sort of minimum standards in regard to notability. If I go digging I can find all sorts of crazy stuff (and in the past I have), but is it worth talking about? A generic crank who spouts standard talking points on an obscure YouTube channel isn't as worthwhile as one with a multi-site media presence and a 5k+ following. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 15:35, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

I've explained my problems with notability in depth before, "A Massive Gay." Just because we may be aware of something doesn't mean the average person is, it's easy being skeptical coming from a state of knowledge, but the average person, no matter how rational they might otherwise be, will still fall victim to bullshit without an easily available source of information on hand to educate people about the actual nature of things. — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 17:30, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

I also agree that notability plays an important role in preventing the Streisland effect. I also think our goal is not to be a comprehensive resource in covering every swath of crazy. This is especially true for those that only repeat talking points and end up being either bland and lite on content or echoing articles on more notable figures who share the viewpoints. I think everyone has a notability metric and different thresholds for what is notable or not, so negotiating those can be tricky. But I think most people agree that we shouldn't have bland articles on trite talking points by small fry. --It's-a me, 🎄LeftyGreenMario!🎄 18:42, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

@don juan - fall victim to what? something that the will never ever encounter because its just some lone loon on youtube that you would have actively search for in the first place? AMassiveGay (talk) 19:59, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Ultimately, we're here to fight the crankery, not the crank. Focus on debunking flat Earth theory itself, not flat earth zealot #9479384930018. Using notable cranks as example is just practicality: more people are more likely to be familiar with them, and it's easier to find information about them. 173.71.123.144 (talk) 03:56, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

DuceMoosolini^{Your friendly RW dictator moderator} 14:50, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

i am sickened that no one acknowledged my kirsty maccoll reference. i know its christmas and many of you would have had better things to do and all, but you are all worse than hitler AMassiveGay (talk) 09:49, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Kirsty who? Kencolt (talk) 10:23, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

this is why the terrorists are winning. not so long ago, this might have a rye smile and a 'i see what you did there'. now? i bet you all throwing sacks of kittens into a river. you've changed rw. AMassiveGay (talk) 11:27, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

@AMassiveGay Are you drunk? ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 14:08, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

It is the day after Christmas... DuceMoosolini^{Your friendly RW dictator moderator} 14:51, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Never mind a wry smile. I had a proper chuckle at that reference. I didn't think I'd have to point that out. But here I am, massively pointing out that I got the reference and also explaining the joke to all the other scumbags and maggots. Did you see what I did there? Spud (talk) 16:10, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

you skirted the problematic next line? Avida Dollars^{her again} 18:39, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

@Avida Dollars I did indeed. You know, given that the song was written by an Englishman and an Irishman in 1985, before the internet was much of a thing, I don't think they really knew what that word meant in the States. After all, the NYPD doesn't have a choir so the songwriters probably weren't exerts in all things American. Spud (talk) 01:06, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Quick, someone make an article on Kristy MacGuffin, that'll show the anti-notability folk. --It's-a me, 🎄LeftyGreenMario!🎄 18:58, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Her dad Ewan was a communist, and her biggest hit was written by the socialist Billy Bragg. @RWRW, get cracking! Avida Dollars^{her again} 18:46, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Yikes, those are unfortunate connections! --RWRW (talk) 19:13, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

There's a Commie in the closet! Quick, someone call Joe "I've got a little list" McCarthy! — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 19:55, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

REDSREDSREDSREDSREDSREDS!!!!!! Avida Dollars^{her again} 20:08, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ COMMIE BASTARDS!!!!! THEY'VE INFILTRATED EVERY LEVEL OF RATIONALWIKI!!! I am Don Juan, and I've got a little list of RWians who have turned traitor by adopting the treasonous "ideology" of communism, they are, as I speak:

@RWRW @RobSmith

Do the treacherous commie filth listed above have anything to say in their defense?! — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 20:25, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

*closes YouTube tab playing USSR anthem* Who have you been talking to? Where are you getting this information? --RWRW (talk) 20:30, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

The defendant does not get to ask questions unless the Court permits it, commie. — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 21:08, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Hey I am a commie too. — Dysk (contribs) 21:37, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

NO!!!!!! THE INFESTATION IS DEEPER THAN EVEN I THOUGHT!!! DAMN YOU, REDS!!!! — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 21:42, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Which ”court”, Don Juan? This is the RationalWiki Unacceptable Activities Committee, or RUAC for short and we will expose, denounce and destroy all those reds under the beds that are threatening our rational community with their insidious and nefarious existence! ScepticWombat (talk) 08:13, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

The better to root out the commie filth infesting our glorious wiki! — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 13:22, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Trump spotted secretly flying over Europe

Apparently he is visiting the troops or something, but failed to tell the public first leading to perplextion. I think the US Government will stay shutdown for the foreseeable future, and Trump feels that a warzone is the safest place for him at this time. — Dysk (contribs) 20:47, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Saw a tweet that someone had seen AF1 flying over UK - didn't believe it at the time. Scream!! (talk) 21:23, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Here: Trump over England Scream!! (talk) 17:52, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Or was it a colourised UFO? Anna Livia (talk) 00:00, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Was Trump literally flying, a la Superman, or was he just in an airplane? — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 13:26, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

@Don Juan Is it a bird? Is it a plane? No, it's our God-Emperor, Donald J. Trump. And yes, he's faster than a bullet. Nerd (talk) 15:59, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

He can leap tall buildings (*cough*Trump Tower*cough*) in a single bound! He's faster than a speeding bullet! He's stronger than a locomotive! He's our God-Emperor, Donaldus Magnus! — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 16:35, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Where are the trumpets (voluntary or last)? Anna Livia (talk) 17:09, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Liberals beware! Super Trump will smack you with his corn cob hair! His super power is screaming about his fucking stupid wall. He takes money from the poor and gives it to the rich. Super Trump's catchphrase is, Give me my wall and make Mexico pay (for it)!--Rationalzombie94 (talk) 18:19, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

We can make a movie out of this: "Twilight of the Super-President: Donald I". — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 18:29, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

We can get James Cameron to direct it. It could make millions. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 19:36, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

I was thinking Michael Bay, maybe we could hire Kubrick's ghost to direct it? — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 19:53, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

How about the washed up Kirk Cameron do it? It could work. Maybe get Randy Newman to do the theme song? --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 22:28, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

I propose we get Ted Nugent to do the musical track. Chickenhawks attract other chickenhawks, you know. — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 22:42, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Ted Nugent would be perfect for doing the musical track. Trump is already stomach churning on his own. Ted Nugent would be the cherry on top of the diarrhea shake. We could make extra money by selling barf bags. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 22:51, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Video about aliens

https://youtu.be/p6UFrQDVRyI

I think this video treads conspiracy theory territory. Still like the channel. I am not saying that what the video says is impossible. Emergency Action Notification --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 23:31, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

I think the above video can be summed up as JAQing off. — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 13:25, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Unlike Science 2.0, who believes in aliens in almost every conceivable way and goes so far as to claim that all the slot machines in Reno have aliens inside them (presumably because he's sore about losing his life savings). Willthenut (talk) 19:48, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Sudden Blue Light in Sky Over NYC

https://newyork.cbslocal.com/2018/12/27/laguardia-airport-transformer-fire/

Official word seems to be it was caused by a large fire at a power plant in Astoryytria. Lots off buzz on social mesia; brace for conspiracy theories. 174.200.36.154 (talk) 02:40, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

You mean its not the Russians hypersonic nuke? nobs ^{piss in my ear} 02:49, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Okay okay. So it wasn't a conventional nuke. It was a conventional warhead that only blew up a power plant. OTOH, nobody reported power outages so it couldn't have been a power plant. nobs ^{piss in my ear} 07:50, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

I heard it was Russian led extraterrestrials. — Dysk (contribs) 10:38, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

The obvious answer - an absence of Trump. Anna Livia (talk) 10:41, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Latest Headlines: Super Trump strikes again! — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 11:35, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

It was infact just massive electrical arcing causing a super-bright blue incandescence. — Dysk (contribs) 13:59, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Obviously this was unexpected, it turned out that the contractors has used a Micheal Bay film prop instead of a correctly rated transformer. The premature failure is just shoddy work. — Dysk (contribs) 14:02, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

So nothing to do with Project Blue Beam, the Big Rip, the establishment of a SpaceTime/Multiverse crossing portal etc.

There is already an aliensdidit(not) story - [5]. Anna Livia (talk) 15:07, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Should we rename Poe Park in the Bronx after you for your astute observations, Nobs? Bongolian (talk) 17:30, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Now what a minute. The power plant supposedly blew up after Verizon went down nationwide and after the Russians test fired a hypersonic missile. What am I missing? nobs ^{piss in my ear} 18:00, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Open your eyes, Rob, the truth is being actively hidden from you! Everyone here at RW is involved in a conspiracy against you, and now I'll be hung for my snitching. Goat help us all. — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 18:02, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

I jus dont git it. Are we 'spose to be afeared of the Ruskies or not? If so, why the cover-up? If not, why do they have Gen. Flynn on the Wheel? nobs ^{piss in my ear} 18:11, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

It is more complex than it appears - involving FTL travel, matter-anti-matter collisions, Trystero, tachyons... and 'a spiderweb of overloaded power sockets.' Anna Livia (talk) 20:19, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

This can only mean one thing: The Cybertronians have arrived en masse. Get ready for the days of Optimus Prime and Megatron, their power grows stronger as we speak. — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 20:44, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

The boyz in Pentagon seem worried. nobs ^{piss in my ear} 23:29, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

There's no more of a reliable source than official Russian propaganda. McCarthy, your hero, would be proud. — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 00:03, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Hidden Flying Phenomenon

A channel called Hidden Flying Phenomenon (HFP) has lately appeared on YouTube. The mental breakdown of someone home alone for the holidays? Or a subtle parody of woo? Enjoy. Millennium Scallion (talk) 17:49, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Science 2.0 is also like that- a guy gradually losing his head until he claims that Bigfoot hates Gwen Stefani. Willthenut (talk) 19:40, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

As a child I was taught to at least respect the title of President, even if you don't like the guy in office.

I still hold to that but Trump is a disgrace to the title of President and the office. I respect the office but not the guy in it. I tried to give a benefit of a doubt, I was also taught that but Trump used that up. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 01:35, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

As a child and young adult, the president was always careful to not explicitly engage in partisan hackery. I never thought Bush should have won over Gore, but I was in middle school and you should have heard what Midwest middle school kids were saying. Clinton was the devil and Gore was a robot, and it was all literal. I'd still find it... easier to live out Trump's term. But maybe it's the time to prosecute, I mean, we're supposed to have all the protocols in place to replace a criminal president. The guy is in violation of the emoluments clause, we've known this since day one. I mean, what better time to try our system of checks and balances out? Nobody really thinks he's in charge of anything anyway. If it actually gets worse, at least we can claim we did it because we are a nation of laws. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 09:24, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

For me it isn't about whether or not we should respect the President. It's about trusting the President. And you never should. From at least the Kennedy administration, the Presidency has shown a disturbing trend towards authoritarianism and erosion of checks and balances. The President now determines not only our nation's policies but what Congress and the people should know about them. Watergate? Fuck off with that. What about the many governments the CIA overthrew, or the FBI's secret war against the Civil Rights Movement, or the web of covert and illegal acts that makes up the Iran-Contra affair? Or all the shit that Bush and Obama got up to? For that matter, what about American involvement in the Vietnam War, which (openly) began with a series of bald-faced lies told by Lyndon Johnson and his administration and killed tens of thousands of Americans? And yet pubic discourse about the presidency is limited to "respectability." That's what makes me fear for the future of my beloved country. The American people are perfectly willing to accept a Commander-in-Chief who does terrible shit as long as he's likable and has an explanation for how it technically wasn't his fault. Trump's a fucking idiot, but I guarantee that when historians look back on this era, they'll find that the most damaging things he did weren't even unusual. All Trump's erratic stupidity does is make the rot of the executive branch clearer to see. But we don't want to think about that. We don't want to think that our leaders might be untrustworthy, or that our government might not be worthy of the ideals it preaches. As long as our president looks and acts the way we want him to, we'll just accept his shady dealings. Oh, we'll feign outrage when they're revealed but we'll almost always lose interest when the next news story comes on. The government determines everything, and it's always benign, so why bother paying attention to it? Criticism is incompatible with patriotism. This is America, after all. It's our country, right or wrong. DuceMoosolini^{Your friendly RW dictator moderator} 10:43, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

My roommate is tryin to pull a triple shift, I stayed up to bug him when he got home so he wouldn't turn a nap into a human's night sleep. Basically, I'm pretty sleep deprived at this point, so bear with me. You're not wrong, and you're sayin things I'd like to say, but I say just because our history sucks doesn't mean we can't/shouldn't pin this guy on an overt technicality. It's about time we pin one of them, right? Not tryna be subversive, but if we don't take action against this current criminal president, what is going to keep the slime from creepin up? I mean, it takes a very strange personality to both want to and be able/willing to climb to the top of government. I'm sure they all have things to hide. After the Kavanaugh circus, I think it's our duty to remind the political elite they weren't born with it. I mean, I think that's how Trump got elected in the first place, so it's maybe a misguided notion, but we're living with capitalist royalty generally in charge. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 12:18, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Duce you got a patent on the formula for apathy, it goes like; "all Presidents do bad shit, are liars and hypocrites, but the american people are idiots, we go along with it, so why bother trying to change anything, don't complain, be cool and just ignore it". 24.91.159.57 (talk)

It's more like @DuceMoosolini is cynical of whether knocking the current idiot off his throne will change anything overall. I'm pretty much the same way, if not further disillusioned. I never understood why I'm supposed to blindly give respect and loyalty to some people while others are supposed to earn it. I mean fuck that shit, I don't even have respect and loyalty for the country as a whole, let alone the asshat leading it. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 15:13, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

True no job should get respect as an automatic perk, and no country should be worhsipped blindly. 24.91.159.57 (talk)

I’m not arguing for apathy at all. Apathy is part of the problem. I’m saying that the executive shouldn’t be blindly trusted, and that this situation won’t change until people truly want it to. DuceMoosolini^{Your friendly RW dictator moderator} 17:22, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

That's a terrible lesson for americans

We fought our stupid damn revolution over how meaningless titles warrant no respect. We'd all be 300% better off if everyone treated the presidency as just another job, one this shitbag is bad at. ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 02:10, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

I respectfully disagree about respecting the title and office. The office and title is supposed to show leadership and representation of the country. I do agree that Trump is a total shit bag. My point is that Trump is abusing the office and title for his own purposes, he is supposed to use the job for the interests of the American people. How is someone supposed to lead the country when all they do is act like a 1st grade child.

I do respect your right to speak your mind. I disagree but life goes on. 😆😆 They took my teeth --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 03:08, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, whatever, you can respect or disrespect my opinion as you like, but teaching children respect for power because it's power makes for adults who can't stand on their own principles. ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 03:22, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

We won't see eye to eye on the what I originally said. I know we can agree that Trump is an incompetent jackal. Sad that he is disrespectful to the constitution and Bill of Rights. It is also sad that Trump is doing a disservice to the people who he is supposed to lead. This has to be one of the biggest embarrassments in United States history. I rather have Obama back in office and I didn't even like the guy. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 04:13, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

@Rationalzombie94, if you simply accept someone's capability or give them respect based on their title, then that is credentialism (an excessive reliance on credentials), and it's fallacious. One should respect someone because of what they can do with or without the backing of credentials. If you don't get it, read the Lou Reed quote that I added on the credentialism page. Bongolian (talk) 04:59, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

That was not what I exactly meant. I meant being President and holding the job is supposed to show leadership. I admit that I have a hard time explaining what I mean. Trump fails to show leadership and fails at representing the people. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 13:15, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

everyone deserves respect

not an american, but heres my take on things anyways.

ive always tried to give people respect from the outset. i dont like the idea that respect should be earned. it should be assumed unless you've reason to think other wise. if i bump into a complete stranger in the street, i give them the same respect i would expect to receive. they do not have to earn it - there would be no time and no time to earn there respect. respect here means you not shouting at each other to get fuck out your way, its one of you giving way and the other giving thanks for giving space. its done in seconds.

if i am at work and someone new starts - they get the respect of assuming that they have every right to be in that job - they've gone through interviews, their credentials and experience were enough to get the position. you might temper it with the knowledge that they may need a little time to find their feet, but you dont question their abilities until after you seen what their work is like.

if i go to a dr, i assume they know what they are doing, that that they have met some minimum standard. second opinions are not sought unless you have reason to doubt their judgement.

it is the same with any business or institution. when you deal with one you assume they are are up to the task that is required - delivery on time, quality as expected, that they dont rip you off. if they do, you assume an unfortunate mistake before incompetant crooks. how they deal with problems when respect might lost.

then you get government institutions. police. tax office. council. parliament. courts. from front line services you interact with through to prime minister or, as in the stated case, president. you need to respect these things. you need to respect the police, you need to know they are at the very least trying their best. if you dont trust them they cant do their job. tax office, the council, courts - the same. if you dont respect them, that you think they incompetent or corrupt, they cannot function. these things only work if we give them enough credit, enough respect that we can leave them to get on with things, that we can cooperate with them as required, able rectify problems. if you refuse to talk to the police, the courts, take every minor error in your taxes as a personal slight or proof of corruption, every interaction is a fight, it all grinds to halt, they start to look at you as a crook, have something to hide. it makes it harder for everyone.

obviously, this respect can lost. police shooting innocents, wrongful convictions, repeated incompetence, major problems of all kinds and how they are dealt with, but even then you have to try and assume they doing there best for the most part, not jump to conclusions. but once its gone, you need a hell of a lot to get it back.

you should respect your government. even if you didnt vote for them, you should assume that they want the best for us even if you disagree on how to achieve it. give em a chance, maybe they prove you wrong.

the problem with this approach is that you just cannot respect your government - trumps administration for you yanks, the tories in the uk for me - because at no point along the line from campaigning to elected office - has anyone behaved with any integrity, has anyone looked like they want whats best for us, have shown us any respect. trump and his fellow republicans or may and her tories have lied and exaggerated, put self interest ahead of their countries, stirring up vitriol and animosity throughout all of society treated us with utter contempt. we should give these people some modicum of respect, but it was lost long ago. with trump, it should have been lost long before he got to office. now hes there hes shredded any hint of respect for his office, and working very hard to shred any hint of respect for your entire political system aided and abetted by all those in congress. why respect the office when those in it dont respect it and dont respect you?

@rationalzombie - you say you dont respect the man but respect the office - what do you do when the man has so thoroughly destroyed that office that it will take more than a change of administration to fix? when the lack of respect is not limited to those in the power but to their supporters too, to pretty much everyone, i dont see a solution. its so easy to sow dissent, to demonise, to set us at each others throats, to just break things, to deny each of us respect. this is what the brexiters and the trumps of this world do. they break things. the easiest thing in the world. but they offer no solutions. they build nothing.

dont know where i'm going with this. treat each other with more respect? its trite but its all i got. AMassiveGay (talk) 12:08, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

I think that would be the best way to explain to it. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 13:17, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

@AMassiveGay In my experience there's a difference between what you describe when you encounter a stranger, and respect. When I encounter a stranger I tend to behave politely, altruistically, and courteously. I do not however, view that as respect. Respect is something you give to someone based on how impressed you are with their behavior or skills, not something freely given to everyone and anyone. Or so my experience has been. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 14:57, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

thats just one aspect of respect. due regard and consideration is another and relevent to the stranger example. it a different definition but not unrelated if it effects how you interact with people. probably a huge generalisation, ive found folk a make a big deal of people needing to earn their respect in situations where it isnt required - they can seem arrogant. we have to earn theirs but they dont have to earn ours. i am less in interested the kind of respect that means you've been impressed by something or other - its generally not mentioned unless you are impressed by something. the other kind, due care and consideration kind, where you respect people differing opinions, their struggles, their choices, their rights, through to respecting an office of some kind and those within - that they have a job to do, have considerations that you may not be aware, that they are not infallible, that they have constraints and rules, red tape, that they are maliciously trying to fuck you over. how much respect or deference you show going to depend the situation and you should expect in return. even our elected representatives should expect this from us, to recognise they are not generally evil people, are trying their best to do the right thing. sadly politics is polarised, society is polarised. respect doesnt win elections and it doesnt win arguments on twitter. people demand respect but dont want to give any so there is no respect anywhere. how do we fix that? AMassiveGay (talk) 18:01, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

What's so special about countries?

Sparked by the previous discussion and featuring me going full tilt anarchist, what's so special about countries? Other than being administrative boundaries they're just lines on a map in my eyes. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 15:16, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Tribalism - it's in our genes, humans are naturally tribalistic, countries are just another form of tribe. — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 15:17, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Good question, Comrade! I would like to add that people are different and like to compete, for prestige, resources or other things. If dogs urinate to mark their territories, than humans do so with political maps, fences, walls, and flags. Here is something fun for you to watch. It shows how different countries can be, starkly different. (This YouTube channel has been making a whole bunch of videos like this.)

Nerd (talk) 16:17, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Without countries you can't be a nationalist and I couldn't say my country is better than ur country and ur country smells. — Dysk (contribs) 16:34, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Some parts of the world are better than others. Would you rather be born in Norway or North Korea? If you are looking for a job, would you rather be in Germany or Greece? If you are an international investor, would you consider doing business in the U.S., Switzerland, and Singapore, or Djibouti, Swaziland, and Somalia? If you are a specialist in the field artificial intelligence, your chances of success, assuming you are willing to work really hard, are optimal in China and the U.S. Very few, if any, other countries even come close to these "AI Superpowers".

Things can be different even in the same country. For example, Eastern China is extremely well developed compared to the Western parts of that country. Nerd (talk) 16:47, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

@Nerd Ah, but there are those who would argue that without the administrative boundaries that national boarders provide, the distribution of progress would be more even. Personally I think such thinking is overly optimistic, but it does raise a few interesting points. Additionally, let's use eastern vs western china as an example here, just to play things out. When you say more developed, do you mean in all areas or just more urbanized? ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 17:07, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

@GrammarCommie I do think that such a vision is overly optimistic and are as realistic as the idea of a planet that can be classified as a "forest world" or an "ocean world" found in certain science-fiction novels or movies. People are just too different.

As for Eastern vs. Western China, Eastern China is of course more urbanized, and with urbanization comes better infrastructure and more economic opportunities. It is a general trend, not just in China but in other countries as well, that people tend to move to urban areas in search of jobs. Metropolitan areas occupy only a tiny fraction of the Earth's land mass but is already home to about half of humanity. High population density means higher demand for things like accommodation, education, mass transit, and so on. Nerd (talk) 17:17, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

@Nerd I thought that might be what you were referring to but I needed to be sure before responding. High Urbanization has major downsides, among which is resource supply. Mining, farming, refining, and processing must all take place away from high residential areas in order to minimize the danger to the inhabitants, as well as to account for needed land in the case of farming and mining. Thus one could argue that less urbanized areas such as Western China are an inevitable trade-off to the more urbanized areas such as Eastern China, and that even without national boarders such trade-offs would occur. Thus I'm not really sure where you going with the idea that nations are required for such population movements, or am I reading that wrong? ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 17:37, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

@GrammarCommie Yes, indeed. Trade-offs are inevitable. High population density means lower capacity, plus the things you mentioned. No, these things happen regardless of national borders. I was answering a question you raised on urbanization. The world is not "flat," so to speak, regardless of whether or not kingdoms, or nation-states exist.

Small correction: Western China tends to be arid and thus unsuitable for agriculture. China's major rivers actually flow East, where the most fertile land is to be found. More fertile land means more people. Nerd (talk) 17:49, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

high population density = easier to get laid. checkmate i think. AMassiveGay (talk) 23:05, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

The science seems to tally. — Dysk (contribs) 00:53, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

@AMassiveGay What in heaven's name is the meaning of this? In the name of Her Majesty the Queen, I'm shocked, good sir! Shocked, I say!

@Dysklyver Facultative sex? Sounds interesting. I like options. Nerd (talk) 15:10, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

@GrammarCommie I thought I should mention this. Different groups of people think and behave differently. More specifically, they have different priorities, which means that accept different trade-offs. For example, would you prefer a highly competitive and innovative market, or a high-tax and heavily regulated one that lags behind? Regulations here concern consumer and privacy protections, as well as labor laws ensuring things like paid vacation leave. This video explores this choice for the IT industry. The economics fascinates me. Nerd (talk) 23:32, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

So what is everyone here doing this New Years Eve (NYE)???

I'm currently starting some serious shit on YouTube and Twitter that may seriously backfire on me. A storm is brewing hehe...Mí má kȍhà hńg gǀȕì ō ǁȁhìn-ā ō hȁ ō gǀè gù ǀxūúnnu. (talk) 02:20, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

What shit, and how do I stoke the fire? — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 02:28, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

I'm making the claim that a very big organization is connected to a dark web cult. When the fire is right I'll enlist you guys as my official fire stokers. Mí má kȍhà hńg gǀȕì ō ǁȁhìn-ā ō hȁ ō gǀè gù ǀxūúnnu. (talk) 03:21, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Wasting my life away on the internet as usual. 𝔊𝔬𝔞𝔱-𝔈𝔪𝔭𝔢𝔯𝔬𝔯 𝔅𝔦𝔤𝔰 (𝔴𝔬𝔯𝔡𝔰 𝔬𝔣 𝔴𝔦𝔰𝔡𝔬𝔪/𝔞𝔠𝔥𝔦𝔢𝔳𝔢𝔪𝔢𝔫𝔱𝔰) 03:23, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Mmm.... yesterday, I had to euthanize my gout-ridden dear parakeet and my sister just so happened to catch stomach flu so my New Year's Eve might not be entirely jovial, have to recover from such a double-punch to my guts. --It's-a me, 🎄LeftyGreenMario!🎄 04:03, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Wait, what? How in the fuck do you euthanase a parakeet? --MtD^Bogan 04:45, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

I don't know the details but what they did was calm the bird in a gas, make her unconscious, then they make an injection that will kill her. Sigh, the attitude is not helping my mood. --It's-a me, 🎄LeftyGreenMario!🎄 07:45, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Ah. Living in Australia I have a backyard full of parakeets and other psittaciformes. Never had cause to gas one, normally a timely collision with the kitchen window does the trick. Happy New Year and condolences on the loss of your beloved pet. --MtD^Bogan 08:11, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

If last year is anything to go by I'll get scaffolder-on-his-stag-night drunk, end up in a fight with a kangaroo and then sleep it all off in the slot. --MtD^Bogan 04:23, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

I'll probably either be studying or spending time with my family. RoninMacbeth (talk) 04:32, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

I'll be sleeping on NYE's eve, other than that, waste time on the Internet as usual. — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 13:07, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

I'll do what I always do. Go to bed early, then get woken up by the neighbour reenacting El Alamein. I really don't know why I bother going to bed before midnight... Avida Dollars^{her again} 13:44, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

I'll be having a plate of spaghetti and a small can of beer. I'll watch the fireworks go off at Taipei 101 on the telly at midnight and go to bed soon afterwards. Mind you, 3 years ago at Chinese New Year, I was drinking whiskey in a bar at 3 o'clock in the afternoon. Next thing I knew, it was 7 hours later and I'd just woken up in a vegetable garden without my shoes or my glasses. Spud (talk)

@Spud The Taipei 101 is one of my favorite pieces of architecture. Good for you, mate!

My New Year's Eve activities shall consist of eating, sleeping, drinking, urinating, defecating, reading and learning. Basically, the usual stuff. Nerd (talk) 15:29, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Wasting my life on the computer reading and posting on forums. slowly wasting away until I am a ghost. Tabula Rasa (talk) 18:14, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Staring at my PC screen playing World of Warcraft and staring at the virtual fireworks over Stormwind like I do every year because I am somewhat life deprived. Also Doctor Who and it's annual holiday episode, which is New Years themed instead of the usual Christmas gag-- guess London isn't that popular a place to be after the six or so holiday invasions so far in the new series. This year, let's catch 'em while they're drunk, I guess... Kencolt (talk) 19:16, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Well that is as good a new year as any I guess. I have a zillion relatives, who haven't yet all fucked off back to wherever they normally live yet. Christmas brings them all out of their hibernation holes. The only reason it isn't hell on Earth is that I managed to avoid seeing the Grumps yet. — Dysk (contribs) 20:58, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

For me, I'm gonna have my eyes glued on NASA Channel to watch coverage of the Ultima Thule flyby half an hour after midnight. Granted, that is, that the government shutdown doesn't interfere with their media activities... You Won't BELIEVE What Astronomers Found In This Neutron Star! - Number Four WILL Shock You! 15:14, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

New Years resolutions

Anyone going to bother with any? I've tried them before and they normally go out the window by February. --RWRW (talk) 21:09, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

I'm taking up jogging. I must be an idiot. Avida Dollars^{her again} 22:13, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

I decided that my New Years resolution will be to drink more. This will work very well because when I fail to keep it, I will end up drinking less... — Dysk (contribs) 22:48, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

I will finally manage to consume an alcoholic beverage. That I actually like. On New Years. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 03:05, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

My resolution is to earn a college degree. Maybe get another tattoo. Dem evul atheist liberal communist with new world order tooook me jurb --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 03:15, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Isn't this old card great? Spud (talk) 07:16, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Back in, hmm... around 2002, I guess, I resolved to never make another New Year's Resolution eve again because I never seemed to be able to follow through with any of the fucking things. Well, that's the one I have kept solidly. Kencolt (talk) 08:23, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

What Would Happen If...

I dug a tunnle through the North Pole to the South Pole? Forgive me for this childish question, but it's been a longtime question I've been meaning to ask someone.

How would gravity come into play, and what are the physics of this? Mí má kȍhà hńg gǀȕì ō ǁȁhìn-ā ō hȁ ō gǀè gù ǀxūúnnu. (talk) 19:02, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

That is actually a very interesting question. Any physics undergraduate has seen this before. It does not have to be from the North Pole to the South Pole. It can be any hole that is as long as the diameter of the Earth and the gravitational physics works out the same. But before I get to the answer, I need to explain something first. So hang on.

There is a useful result in physics that applies to any inverse square law known as Newton's Shell Theorem. Now, Newton's law of universal gravitation only applies to point masses. If you want the gravitational field or potential of an extended body, you need to add up all the contributions from all the points making up that body. (This is where integral calculus comes in. But we won't need it here.) Newton's Shell Theorem states that outside a spherically symmetric shell, the gravitational field is as if all the mass of the shell is concentrated at its center. Inside, the force is identically zero. But a ball is just a stack of concentric spheres, so you can use integral calculus yet again. And again, outside, the gravitational field of the ball is that of a point particle of the same mass. Inside, the force varies linearly as a function of the distance from the center, rather like Hooke's law of elasticity.

And we have the answer to your question. If we were to dig a hole through the center of the Earth and drop a test particle in it, the particle would undergo simple harmonic motion, as far as gravitational physics is concerned. In other words, it would just oscillate back and forth, rather like a mass on a frictionless spring. Nerd (talk) 20:03, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

You would melt while going through the centre. Because HOT HOT HOT. — Dysk (contribs) 20:37, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Or drown as the Arctic Ocean poured into the hole. Avida Dollars^{her again} 22:15, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Funny thought, but wouldn't that create a giant geezer as the water is converted into steam and forced back out? — Dysk (contribs) 22:50, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

That's what happened to Krakatoa in 1883. Avida Dollars^{her again} 23:11, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Gravity would reverse and about halfway through you would go from falling to climbing. Willthenut (talk) 23:26, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Willthenut, would my view change at all? Mí má kȍhà hńg gǀȕì ō ǁȁhìn-ā ō hȁ ō gǀè gù ǀxūúnnu. (talk) 02:57, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘The tunnel can never be more than hypothetical because the crushing pressure and intense heat would destroy any conceivable tunnel material long before one got near the center. Consider that the Kola Superdeep Borehole only reached about 12 km deep, but the Earth's crust (outer layer) is 5-70 km deep. The Earth's center is 6,371 km deep. Drilling was stopped at Kola because of higher than expected temperatures (180 °C). Bongolian (talk) 04:45, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

higher than expected temperatures or mole men? AMassiveGay (talk) 09:35, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

What type of mole men we talking about? One of them bastards tried to rip me off the other day, saying he had a tunnel to sell me in Alaska. — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 14:20, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

The TRUE Answer

Walnut would happen if you dug straight through the Earth. — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 11:44, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Ghost proof

If there was a photo of a ghost without photoshop or anything, would you or would you not believe in ghosts? Willthenut (talk) 23:05, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Something tells me that whatever you're about to share will be of such blatantly crappy quality as to make debunking it redundant. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 02:13, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

There's fairly basic problems with this question too: What exactly makes something in a photo "a ghost"? Why should I see something, no matter how unusual, and decide "ghost" is an accurate description of it? What are the defining visible characteristics of a ghost? With a dog, for example you could say that, while there are exceptions to all these things, you generally file them under "4 legs, tail, fur, long muzzle, size in range of 10-150 pounds." With a ghost, it's pretty much just "well, you just know it's a ghost because it's weird but somehow humanish" ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 02:26, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

What if it was a white spectre?Willthenut (talk) 04:54, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Did you read a word @Ikanreed and I wrote? You don't have any proof of what a ghost might be let alone what such a thing would actually be. But whatever, cough up your picture. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 05:03, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

if ghosts turned out to be real, and you had an honest to goodness photo of one, i'm still going to think its a hoax of some kind. if i came face to face with a ghost i would assume its a hoax or a drug fuelled hallucination. i'd require some kind widely known announcement from respected scientists saying ghosts are real and they done extensive research to prove it. otherwise, i will always think it a hoax, no matter how convincing a photo you think you have. you can create convincing photos and videos cheaply and easily these days. you require more than a photo for proof. AMassiveGay (talk) 09:45, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

I don't know man, I've experienced some weird things in my day that make me tilt my head a little, but I hesitate (and that's putting it mildly) to say the weird phenomena I experienced was caused by ghosts or anything supernatural. — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 14:25, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

What if the ghost resembled a human in almost every conceivable way, but also possessed so many supernatural qualities that it could not be something of this world? Willthenut (talk) 18:06, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

@Willthenut Pictures, now or you're just JAQing off and the conversation ends. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 18:09, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

@don juan - if you inclined to believe in such things, then everything unexplained becomes ghosts and stuff, and the more you think about them the more convinced you become. whats weird to you is common place to some else. how much of an effort to get to the bottom of such things do people generally make? chances are if you cant think of an explanation right away it gets talked up as spooky story to tell down the pub. if ghost were real, they wouldnt be weird or spooky - they'd be everywhere. think of all the creatures that have lived on this planet. all the cows that have died. the dinosaurs. amoebas, cockroaches. where are all the ghosts of cockroaches? if ghosts were real we'd see them all the time and not realise they were even ghosts. a spooky shadow in a photograph? lazy hoax. AMassiveGay (talk) 18:23, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

OK, here's the picture. Just keep in mind, it really weirds me out. I took it at the Boston marathon last year, and then I noticed the ghost in there. Real scary. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1l0BTcUaseytqJFlDwjwqVlgOjfnGrVuj/view?usp=sharing Keep in mind, this pic ain't for the faint of heart. Willthenut (talk) 18:27, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Ghost In Crowd

Ghost In Crowd

Where's the ghost? All I see is a 'Shopped rectangular head. Scream!! (talk) 18:32, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Which a Tin Eye search locates (among others) as 'The Nun' here Scream!! (talk) 18:38, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

No, that was just some lady dressed up as The Nun. Notice anything... unusual... in the background? Willthenut (talk) 18:39, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Errr ... no?Scream!! (talk) 18:43, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

The kid on the extreme LEFT with the tan baseball cap is looking RIGHT at the camera. Also... HE HAS NO BODY. Willthenut (talk) 18:47, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

What are you on? Can I get some please it seems to be good. Scream!! (talk) 18:52, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Nobody else is looking straight at the camera. THAT KID with the white hat is a ghost. I'm positive of it. Willthenut (talk) 18:54, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

LogicnSuch, you're an idiot. My first prediction was dead on the money. Go somewhere else, you pathetically immature moron. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 19:00, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

PSA Ghosts are NOT REAL, so this hypothetical argument is really just asking; how easily are you conned. — Dysk (contribs) 19:09, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

I'm just saying, that kid in the hat looks sorta suspicious. I suppose he might not be a ghost. Willthenut (talk) 19:26, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

@Willthenut Here's a tip from a pro. If you're going to fake a new identity, don't use the exact same behavior as your old identity. Unless you're a juvenile attention seeking moron who requires other people's responses because their parents didn't love them enough, or loved them too much. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 19:36, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

My post is nothing like that. Just a simple question.Willthenut (talk) 19:39, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

@Willthenut It's the same presentation of obviously faked pictures, the same JAQing off, the same concern trolling bullcrap, the same in every single way. And, it's by the same person. No one cares about your pathetically insignificant life, you dumbass little brat. If you have issues with no one caring, see a shrink instead of playing these idiotic games with strangers on the internet. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 19:44, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

No need to respond if you don't want to respond. Willthenut (talk) 19:45, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

@Willthenut Fuck this sealioning bullshit. You want attention, you got it. It's toxic as all fuck but you got it. You happy now? No? Too bad. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 19:49, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

I don't need or want any attention. Willthenut (talk) 20:15, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ @A Massive Gay I didn't say I believed in such things, in fact I said I would be, at best, hesitant to ascribe supernatural phenomena to be the cause of the weird events I've experienced, when there are perfectly natural explanations for most of them, the few that can't be pinned down to natural causes include a compass flying across my room out of fucking nowhere. Don't ask for evidence because I don't have any, anecdotal evidence is the best I got, and I am painfully aware that anecdotes are the weakest form of evidence. — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 20:35, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Say there WAS a photo, though, which had been PROVEN not to have been altered in any way- would it work? Willthenut (talk) 20:37, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Can you shut the hell up, you're derailing the conversation. — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 20:38, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

For my EAS YouTube channel, I am considering making a scenario involving a Trump emergency.

The idea is that Trump gets impeached and goes on a rampage. Anyone like the idea?

This message is approved by Undead EAS Productions. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 04:17, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Will it include nukes? — Dysk (contribs) 12:41, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

trump on a rampage is not scary - hes not exactly physically capable of anything. nukes and other crazy orders? thats going to require other people to go along with him. AMassiveGay (talk) 12:50, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Having it involves nukes sounds good. One EAS scenario from a channel I am subscribed to has a similar scenario. Done by the Final Minutes channel. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 13:21, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

It'll be Trump's farewell speech. — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 14:18, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

In 6 years time. --RWRW (talk) 14:36, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Considering the way things are going against him, I doubt it. — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 14:43, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

You have no idea how much money is going into 2020, if you thought the last election is rigged, just wait till you see what happens this time round. — Dysk (contribs) 18:09, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Sounds like fun. The scenario should include him shooting someone in the middle of fifth avenue. Finds out he can get away with it just like he predicted. Then he gets a bunch of weapons and drives through blue states gunning down random people yelling how a president can't be prosecuted. He ends up at the Mexican border for a big slaughter finale. Oh and dont forget to have him he divorce Melania and take Ivanka as his wife. Millennium Scallion (talk) 19:46, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

I like the input. Got the creative juices flowing. Undead EAS Productions thanks RationalWiki. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 20:28, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Fucking Xbox

My fucking Xbox is refusing to take my goddamn disk even though the disc is relatively intact and the damn thing will take other discs perfectly fine. We tried cleaning it, doing everything, even using a lens cleaner to make the goddamn disc work, and it still won't accept the damn thing. Advice anyone? — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 15:51, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Chuck it. Actually, the drive might need replacing. It's usually a module that can be taken out and a new one put back in. Other than that? Use downloads. Or as i suggested, chuck it. Cardinal Chang (talk) 17:34, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Rethinking the Right

In other words, what is modern conservatism in America? Is there a general template? Are there clear boundaries? Check out these remarks by a historian. Nerd (talk) 16:34, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Ghost Proof 2.0

I'm not going to lie, I've experienced odd things, and now it's time to talk about it. All of the following is true. A few years ago, in 2015 I believe, my grandmother was a heavy smoker and since I was around her a lot, I was getting a constant influx of second hand smoke and it slightly worried me. So in the middle of the night on my bed, half asleep I said, "God, if you're real, make my lungs clean.

I also asked that my grandmother be given strength to quit. I didn't mean any god in particular, and my prayer didn't end in amen, but I said it with sincerity. After that, as I gradually became more asleep, my thoughts drifted to other things. Fifteen minutes passed and I was awoken from my sleep by the sensation of cold in my chest. I was honestly kind of freaked out, but it went away and I was left wondering whether or not this was the answer.

There was also the time that I heard an eldritch (no other word to describe it) voice utter something unintelligible, and I've never used drugs before. I wasn't just scared either, I remember wanting to understand what had been said. Mí má kȍhà hńg gǀȕì ō ǁȁhìn-ā ō hȁ ō gǀè gù ǀxūúnnu. (talk) 19:07, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Bullshit. Willthenut (talk) 20:21, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

What you experienced in regards to the nightmarish experience upon waking can be chalked up to sleep paralysis, and perhaps you've unwillingly committed the fallacy of correlation is equivalent to causation, when we know that not to be the case. Coincidences happen. — Ɖøn Ĵuan ^Harass 20:32, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

I'm not a troll

Some have stated that I could be a troll. This is false. To prove that I am not a troll, I will give you potentially valuable information involving Science 2.0 and Videos For People, PROVING that they are, in fact, the same idiot- in exchange for an end to my ban. Are any of you interested in this evidence? It is relatively foolproof and I have discovered it. If any of you want to hear it, simply unban me and I can prove to you, once and for all, that the Videos For People/Science 2.0 universe is much, MUCH more connected than you thought it was. Willthenut (talk) 21:07, 31 December 2018 (UTC)