Maybe that’s why Raj is getting such a shellacking, we’re beating the clown.
Nah, that would mean we’re afraid of him and…wellll…how do I put this nicely? We’re not.
Louis
Louis:
May 30th, 2012 at 6:23 am
Pentatomid,
You should see this cool trick he can do with marbles and his hands. And he’s great at low budget parties where no booze is available.
Louis
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 6:35 am
Pentatomid,
You should see this cool trick he can do with marbles and his hands. And he’s great at low budget parties where no booze is available.
Louis
Keep him away from the kid’s punch bowl and make sure to check the crawl space when the party is over.
DLC:
May 30th, 2012 at 6:42 am
when I was a kid, there was this evil clown that lived down in the storm drains. . . he would come out to steal children . . . Let me see, was his name Cardinal Ratzinger ? or Pennywise?
I forget now. It’s been a long time.
Louis:
May 30th, 2012 at 7:10 am
Rev BDC,
Anyone who says “suffer little children to come unto me” should probably not be at kids’ parties at all. And given what many of his Official Catholic Chappies seem to feel on the matter of kids, I’m not sure he shouldn’t be kept away with a shotgun. Certainly that Muhammed fellow has dodgy ideas about young ladies. And the god thingy is mad keen on impregnating virgins, a paraphilia with deeply misogynistic tendencies.
Hmm, let him in, get him to make the wine, then {cough} “end the party early” pleading a morning appointment for everyone coincidentally.
Kinda like the guy with the best fake ID that people hate because of his personal hygiene problem, but need for the bevvies.
Hmm, let him in, get him to make the wine, then {cough} “end the party early” pleading a morning appointment for everyone coincidentally.
Kinda like the guy with the best fake ID that people hate because of his personal hygiene problem, but need for the bevvies.
yep, that’s Jesus alright.
jonmilne:
May 30th, 2012 at 7:21 am
I really hate to be the one that’s going to end up doing the biggest pwnage of Raj yet again – I mean, not to blow my own trumpet, but I was the one who lead him into asking his most stupid question ever on this site, namely “Where did I define God?” – but on the other hand I’m a massive egotist and having a whole bunch of people praise me on ruthlessly I burned him last time has turned out to be a massively alluring factor in tempting me to massively pwn him again:
Raj, with regards to this God that you’ve posited on this site, does it actually make ANY difference whatsoever whether we believe in it or not? Like, for instance, do you think that us non-believers will be doomed to an eternity in hell if we don’t believe, while thinking that believers like yourself will be granted with life in heaven? This is a hook of many of the mainstream religions in order to attract followers, which namely takes the form of what I like to call the “Reward/Punishment Gambit”. Speaking as an ex-Christian, I can testify to the basic effectiveness of this type of marketing from followers of any specific God: “Believe what we say and you will be rewarded with paradise, don’t believe in what we say and you’ll be tortured forever!”
A simple “Yes” or “No” answer will be sufficient here, but either way you lose.
If you don’t believe that there’s any real benefit to believing and drawback to not believing in your God, then there’s even less reason to both believe and worship your God since your God can’t do shit if we don’t do those things. Heck, it will make your God even lamer than the mainstream Gods, and that will be one heck of an achievement.
If however you believe that we will get punished if we don’t believe, then you’ve contradicted yourself again and are therefore subject to another loss. See Raj, it was you who said to us that “it was by God’s own design” that we were supposedly made to be “limited in our understandings about God and how he works”. And yet if you think that your God is capable of rewarding/punishing people for believing/not believing in it, then you’ve added yet another definition to a seemingly “undefinable” God, namely that which can make judgments on humanity. Furthermore, it also makes your God if it exists a complete fucking morally corrupt asshole since it punishes people for not believing in it EVEN THOUGH IT WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR SUPPOSEDLY LIMITING PEOPLE’S MINDS SO THAT THEY WOULDN’T SEE EVIDENCE TO BELIEVE IN IT IN THE FIRST PLACE.
As well as this post, Raj, I’d really appreciate if you also address my previous post to you. Please do not hide behind the fact that my post was long, it was still considerably more educated and informed than the really poor quality responses that you have levelled towards me, even despite the fact that throughout our entire exchanges with you, I’ve probably been absolutely the most civil and patient one here dealing with what you write.
Much thanks,
Jon Milne
Louis:
May 30th, 2012 at 7:24 am
Jon Milne,
Don’t worry about it. It’s nice to have someone take Raj seriously enough to bother with him.
It’s something I do once in a while, as do many here. Very effective. But you can’t expect one person to do all the heavy lifting, hence why we spread the jobs out. I think Chigau has to take the next abject muppet seriously! ;-)
Heck, it will make your God even lamer than the mainstream Gods, and that will be one heck of an achievement.
We’ve secretly replaced YHWH with Raj’s patented formula God Lite. Let’s see if anyone notices!
jonmilne:
May 30th, 2012 at 7:27 am
Reproducing my previous post that Raj didn’t answer:
Where have I defined God? I have already said why and in which context I use the word God. Can’t repeat what I have already repeated 20 times.
You defined him as something that couldn’t be defined, and where as a result minds trying to define him are limited in how they can do so. But that’s STILL A DEFINITION. If you TRULY couldn’t define God for us, you’d simply say “I don’t know” and admit you’re either ignorant or being simply disingenuous on the subject. Either way, you’ve self-contradicted yourself.
>And, what do you mean by:
“what precisely would be the point of having limitations placed on the human mind in order to understand God“.
Here is what I said:
“God CANNOT be defined or conceptualized. Not Possible. Or, let’s put it this way: Human minds have limitations placed upon them. The mind cannot understand God, and this is by God’s own design. **”
The bolded parts answer your question by what I mean. What purpose does it serve for “God” to make it so that it’s creation can’t understand exactly what it is? When crafting a supposedly “intelligently designed” world, what benefit exactly would it serve to God to have its created people not comprehend it, and what benefit would it serve to the people to be ignorant of the meaning of the supposedly existent God to which you posit?
The mind has limitations placed on it, and because of these limitations, the mind CANNOT understand God. No matter how hard you try. Now when I say the cannot ‘understand’ God, it means the mind cannot comprehend what God is, how God operates, and why God does what God does. Which means, your questions, which are questions originating from your mind, cannot be answered.
My question was: What is the practicality of “limiting our minds” so that we “cannot understand God”? Nonetheless, even if one buys into the notion that your paragraph just there – rather than amounting to more obfuscation – is even remotely considerable as an actual answer to my question, we still have the problem that you’ve just self-contradicted yourself AGAIN.
On the one hand, you claim our minds are so limited that we can’t comprehend God, and yet nonetheless this is a God that you claim to worship. Which means that if that’s truly the case, then despite the fact you have a human mind and therefore have all the “limitations” you talked about, you regardless still seem to UNDERSTAND and COMPREHEND your God of choice enough to WORSHIP it. But by your own logic, that’s simply not possible. There’s close to zero sense in worshipping any of the Gods that have been given certain definitions of characteristics by some of the more main-stream religious cults. There’s ABSOLUTE ZERO sense in worshipping something that you yourself claim that you as a human absolutely do not understand.
Here is one example which I have given many times before. Can you use to mind to visualize something that you haven’t experienced with your sense before? For example, can you visualize the colour ultra-violet in its true form (not false colour)? Or, could you visualize or imagine existence without space and time? Can you imagine ‘what’ was ‘before’ the big bang?
You add an addendum to your point on colour, namely about I how apparently I should not present you with any stuff on the science behind colour perception and the colour spectrum.
What you’re pulling here is similar to something Ray Comfort did in his interview on the Atheist Experience, wherein Ray asked the AE hosts to give him evidence on evolution. I will display the link later on in my post, but what was particularly revealing about the exchange was that the hosts gave Ray some damn good evidence (namely to do with how the development of vaccines are aided, the great deal of transitional fossils, the DNA evidence, the observation of speciation in the lab including flies and bacteria) and Ray rejects all the evidence the hosts present based on his presuppositions despite it being perfectly valid.
That’s what you’re doing here by rejecting the scientific explanations of how colour spectrums and perceptions actually work. They don’t fit with your world-view, so you disregard them, despite having nothing remotely decent resembling evidence to offer as an alternative explanation.
Matt asks why can’t he say that? Ray proclaims that is ignorance and an atheist cannot have that. Matt corrects Ray and says yes you can because atheists are not proclaiming absolute certainty. Ray says Christians DO, and they know there is a creation an a creator. Matt repeats himself by telling Ray that he is just asserting that it is a creation, which is different from demonstrating that this knowledge is true.
What Ray does here is basically saying I can label it as I wish because no one else can explain it to me. Ray is still simply asserting that everything is a creation without providing a shred of proof that it is the result of divine creation, and failure to explain it in a natural process does not mean his position wins by default. Ray claims to “know” that it is a creation, but if he cannot demonstrate it, then he does not know it.
Without evidence, and proper application of the Scientific Process, you cannot just claim that your version of events is the truth. I’m sure I’m not the first person to say this to you, and I almost certainly won’t be the last, but the burden of proof is on YOU.
And please, do some trimming and pruning on your future comments if it is possible.
Sorry buddy, but to paraphrase a great mind, Richard Lenski when he was confronting Conservapedians on their similar level of ignorance and obfuscating and intellectual dishonesty that you’re displaying (especially since you disregarded the entire first half of my last post where I rip Scwartz to shreds):
“I offer this lengthy reply because we are educators as well as scientists. It is my sincere hope that some readers might learn something from this exchange, even if you do not.”
FossilFishy (Lobed-finned Killer of Threads):
May 30th, 2012 at 7:29 am
When my daughter was three she went through a period where she refused to go to sleep unless her mother was present. We tried lots of tactics but nothing worked and it was getting worse and worse. In the end we decided to go with a modified “cry it out” strategy.
In the straight up method you simply put the child to bed, shut the door and leave them there until they cry themselves to sleep. That seemed cruel and also felt like it had the implied message of “we won’t always be there for you”. So we put her to bed, told her we loved her and that she had to stay in bed, left and shut the door. I waited in the hall until I heard her get out of bed. I then came back in, picked her up, put her back in bed, tucked her in, told her I loved her and that she had to stay in bed. This seemed to us to have the right message: bed time is non-negotiable, we’re doing this because we love you and we will always be there for you, especially when you are being naughty. :)
Through the course of this my emotions ran the gamut. First I was nervous and apprehensive about how it would go. Then I became quite upset at the obvious distress my daughter was exhibiting. And as time passed, the count of how many times she got out of bed climbed from ten to twenty to forty to eighty and with that mounting number my mood swung round. I grew more and more admiring of the tenacity of my intelligent, beautiful, wilful little girl. I began to barrack for her. “Come on, one more time, don’t let a meany like me win.” I whispered to myself after putting her back yet again. I lost count somewhere in the nineties and she eventually didn’t so much give up, as run out of energy to continue. My back and arms ached for a couple of days after: The Toddler Workout ™, coming soon to a bankrupt Zumba franchise near you.
Perhaps this is why I have a soft spot for Raj. I mean yes, his light bending density has time and again made me truly laugh out loud and I do enjoy the self-esteem boost that that gives me. But I also admire unblinking tenacity, misguided though it might be. YMMV of course.
Oh the other hand I just realised that my three year old is also smarter than Raj. She knew when she was beat. The next night only took a dozen or so repeats to get her to stay in bed, and the following night just a couple, and we haven’t had a problem since.
So there you go Raj, increasing my self esteem once again, only this time by the second hand glory in being the father of a three year old who’s smarter than a purported adult. Please I beg of you, don’t flounce for real, you’re the gift that just keeps on giving.
…I’ve probably been absolutely the most civil and patient one here dealing with what you write.
I used to do that, too — attempt intellectual engagement with the clowns. I’m glad you’re taking that role here. While I hope you have better experiences than I, there is a good chance you’ll find what I found: folks like Raj don’t want the truth. They don’t want debate. They don’t want to explore their own ideas, however interesting or mundane.
They want to pontificate. They want to proselytize. They want you to tell them their thoughts are brilliant and original and insightful, and you are enlightened.
But I suspect you already know that, and are sincere in spite of Raj’s patent willful ignorance. In which case, you are a far more patient person than I.
FossilFishy (Lobed-finned Killer of Threads):
May 30th, 2012 at 7:37 am
Thank you John.
Hurinomyces bruxellensis:
May 30th, 2012 at 7:58 am
Pentatomid
Wow, I didn’t know Jesus worked as a clown…
And to think the catholic church has been faithfully reproducing the last supper all these years, and callously omitting the colorful balloon animals that followed!
antigodless:
May 30th, 2012 at 8:09 am
Right back at you, Sunshine.
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 8:11 am
Awwwwww someone’s feelings are hurt because people are making jokes about their make believe friend.
Your thoughts are brilliant and original and insightful, and I am enlightened.
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 8:16 am
Good grief. That’s all you’ve got?
The Zombie Jesus thing is a joke. A play on a myth.
Your video attempts to make a point but….
where is it?
FossilFishy (Lobed-finned Killer of Threads):
May 30th, 2012 at 8:28 am
Weee, that rebuttal was so weak antigodless that EPO, synthetic growth hormone and a killer exoskeleton wouldn’t be enough to get up and walking. Much like your non-existent zombie BFF I might add.
Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:
May 30th, 2012 at 8:51 am
Sorry AntiIMAGINARYDEITYless, until you provide conclusive physical evidence for your imaginary deity, it remains imaginary. Evidence that will pass muster with scientists, magicians, and professional debunkers, as being of divine, and not natural (scientifically explained), origin. Same for your babble, a book of mythology/fiction you claim is inerrant. And what have you presented so far? Your unevidenced OPINION, which *POOF* is dismissed as bullshit, and makes your deity and babble bullshit…Welcome to science, where evidence, not YOUR OPINION, rules…
The Zombie Jesus thing is a joke. A play on a myth.
The video was very much a play on a myth. Those were, after all, mythical misrepresentations of atheism and atheists.
The major distinction is, we don’t believe the myth we’re lampooning. I suspect antigodless is jejune enough to believe not only the myth of the resurrected Christ, but also the myth of the evil atheist.
I will admit to being weak and therefore unwilling to watch the video, despite the clear state-of-the-art animation and screenwriting it so clearly embodies.
If someone who has bothered to do so could clue in the less brave of us – are there any points made in the (no doubt) in-depth analysis of faith versus godlessness other than “Hur hur, atheists R dumb and I can give them dumb names,” by chance?
Because if there’s more to it than that, I’ll gird up all my various loins and watch the thing, as the last chewtoy I was working on appears to have long since scarpered.
Even better, antigodless could personally summarize the arguments presented in their (I presume) deeply insightful video. That would be helpful.
Why, Nigel,… Are you sayng that we atheists aren’t evil!?! But I just renovated the old secret volcano base. Fitted a new doomsday device and everything. I was going to have a baby barbecue and all too. Goddamn.
Hurinomyces bruxellensis:
May 30th, 2012 at 8:59 am
antigodless, a sincere thank you for the amusing video. My absolute favorite part occurs at about 1:05 when a banner says “watch as these bumbling little atheists attempt to make a cogent argument”, and then none of them actually make any arguments.
This is a video with a wonderful message, namely that theists can appropriate our “fairytale” line and use it to call us names, but they cannot address our ideas. Have fun with that sunshine. Let me know if you come up with any colorful ones the next time you are seething about how your rhetoric doesn’t make any sense.
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 9:09 am
The video was very much a play on a myth. Those were, after all, mythical misrepresentations of atheism and atheists.
you have a point
Hurinomyces bruxellensis:
May 30th, 2012 at 9:11 am
pentatomid
Might I ask where you’re nym comes from? I’ve been wondering about it
Brettanomyces bruxellensis, which is one of the species of wild yeast commonly found in Belgian lambic ales and saisons. The species name is derived from the latinate spelling of Brussels.
Hurin is my stable nym. You can call me Hurin for short if you like.
FossilFishy (Lobed-finned Killer of Threads):
May 30th, 2012 at 9:13 am
Perhaps that video is an example of the same cognitive collapse that happens to musicians when they find Jesus and lose their talent. I’m sure that prior to the videographer being washed in the blood of JEEBUS they were creating things like this.
Ah, I see. A fellow fan of Belgian beer. The ‘Brussels’ bit I got already (I’m Belgian myself so that was part of why I asked).
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 9:17 am
Brettanomyces bruxellensis, which is one of the species of wild yeast commonly found in Belgian lambic ales and saisons. The species name is derived from the latinate spelling of Brussels.
we want the funk
Louis:
May 30th, 2012 at 9:27 am
I once heard a tale, probably apocryphal, that a Belgian lambic beer brewery was required by EU Health and Safety regs to remove all its old Nth century tiles from the pipes/ducts down which the heavenly brew used to flow.
They did so, putting in New, Clean and Shiny tiles™. As required.
And they no longer got lambic beer out of the other end. It turned out that the bacteria in the old tiles were what made the beer lambic beer.
For those not in the know lambic beer ages like wine ages. Normal, non-lambic beer doesn’t.
Louis
chigau (違う):
May 30th, 2012 at 9:30 am
Louis
I’m supposed to do what to which muppet?
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 9:33 am
For those not in the know lambic beer ages like wine ages. Normal, non-lambic beer doesn’t.
Not necessarily true. Many higher alcohol beers will age just fine. Imperial stouts for example do well.
Louis:
May 30th, 2012 at 9:40 am
Rev BDC,
Well I learned something today. And about beer too. I didn’t think that was even possible! :-)
There’s a difference between ‘aging just fine’ and aging like a lambic ale (which is a thing of pure beauty).
Seriously, though, you’re quite correct in that lambics aren’t the only beers that age. Though it is rather exceptional.
I think what Louis was referring to is that lambic ales, unlike other beers, are fermented spontaneously, like wines. in other words, it is fermented through exposure to wild yeast strains present in the air and the building of the brewery. Other beers are fermented by the addition of cultivated yeast strains. As a result, the properties of a lambic ale is much more dependent on the environment than other beers.
Louis:
May 30th, 2012 at 9:41 am
Chigau,
It’s your turn to take the next clueless troll here seriously. You have to be nice to them for an above average number of posts, take their “arguments” apart in detail and generally treat them like special snowflakes. Rather like Jon Milne is doing to Raj.
Don’t object, your name came up on the rota. See?
{Shows Chigau the rota}
Louis
KG:
May 30th, 2012 at 9:46 am
An, antigodless-but-brainless couldn’t stick the flounce!
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 9:48 am
I think what Louis was referring to is that lambic ales, unlike other beers, are fermented spontaneously, like wines. in other words, it is fermented through exposure to wild yeast strains present in the air and the building of the brewery. Other beers are fermented by the addition of cultivated yeast strains. As a result, the properties of a lambic ale is much more dependent on the environment than other beers.
Oh I’m well aware of Lambics (Had a bottle from Brasserie Cantillon Brouwerij a friend had been saving not too long ago) and how they are made I was just correcting the idea that only Lambics age well.
And wines are not typically fermented through wild yeast strains. They use cultivated yeast as well.
chigau (違う):
May 30th, 2012 at 9:48 am
(Looks at rota.)
OK.
(Rolls up sleeves.)
Where’s it to, then?
And wines are not typically fermented through wild yeast strains. They use cultivated yeast as well.
Oh, you are of course quite right. That was a stupid mistake on my part. Although wines could quite easily be made through spontaneous fermentation. I guess using cultivated yeasts just adds a level of control to achieve a desired end-result. I don’t know all that much when it comes to wine making. More of a beer person myself.
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 9:57 am
Well I learned something today. And about beer too. I didn’t think that was even possible! :-)
Yep there are even people with beer cellars.
In fact there are a lot of people with beer “cellars” for aging beer, me included.
If you consider a specific temp controlled fridge a cellar.
I have a number of bottles I’ve been aging for a few years and a bunch from the last couple.
Typically anything above 8% will age though there are some lower ABV styles that age well too. This is thrown out the window with super hoppy IPAs. They lose their flavor rapidly after being brewed due mainly to the hop volatility. Drink your big ass IPAs fresh.
Lambics of course, Barley Wines, Stouts, Belgian strong ales, Triples, Quads, some porters, other Bretty ales, sours, Berliner weisse, some Saisons, and a number of other styles etc..
If I think a beer will age well (and I can afford it) I’ll buy two (or more) of each. One to drink and one to age.
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:03 am
Although wines could quite easily be made through spontaneous fermentation. I guess using cultivated yeasts just adds a level of control to achieve a desired end-result. I don’t know all that much when it comes to wine making. More of a beer person myself.
Yeah totally. I’ve had lambics that completely change their character from year 1 to year 2 because of the nature of the wild yeast. Sometimes with amazing results, occasionally not so much.
There are a lot of cool brewers doing crazy funky things with wild yeast. Allagash has a line of coolship beers in this exact vein. Had a few of them and they are fantastic.
Others are the The Bruery, Russian River, Lost Abbey, New Belgium and many others.
It’s a great time to be a beer lover.
I’m a big fan of Sour and Funky beers.
RahXephon, Bouncer of the De Facto Feminist Club:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:04 am
I watched IT as a kid, which was a bad idea, so thanks for the murderous clown flashbacks, PZ.
As far as TZT, I thought this was where trolls were quarantined? This all seems far too genteel! Where are the insults? The fiery recriminations? The porcupines?
Not at all. Just not in the simple, trivial evil ways portrayed by the Seven Atheists in the video. People who do not understand the evil of atheism simply don’t understand how sophisticated the evil of atheism is.
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:08 am
Sorry that was very USA centric on the brewery list. Was not intended.
If I think a beer will age well (and I can afford it) I’ll buy two (or more) of each. One to drink and one to age.
I was thinking of doing that. I currently don’t have the space for it, though. Although come to think of it… Plenty of space at my parents’house… Hmmm.
1. No basement or cellar due to extreme proximity to the ocean. Those things tend to flood very easy around here.
2. 95-105 degree heat throughout the summer meaning a garage will not work.
So I had to commandeer a second refrigerator and through my masculine guile and exerting my Man of the house power (ie.. begging) I was allowed to use it as my beer fridge / cellar.
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:15 am
Beer is proof that yeast exists, and loves us.
so fucking stealing this
FossilFishy (Lobed-finned Killer of Threads):
May 30th, 2012 at 10:15 am
RahXephon
This all seems far too genteel!
Well, we can’t have that! What to do, what to do….ah yes!
I enjoy the occasional VB (The much reviled mass produced Victoria Bitter).
Not at all. Just not in the simple, trivial evil ways portrayed by the Seven Atheists in the video. People who do not understand the evil of atheism simply don’t understand how sophisticated the evil of atheism is.
Thank goodness for that. Now I can continue my evil ways without worries… Now where did I put that death ray…
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:19 am
Next “project” is another fridge for curing meat….
As far as TZT, I thought this was where trolls were quarantined? This all seems far too genteel! Where are the insults? The fiery recriminations? The porcupines?
Yeah, well, little troll action for the moment. Just grab a pint with us.
Uhm, I’m embarrassed to say it’s still in my garage from when I borrowed it from you two months ago. I mean, your volcanic base wasn’t finished yet, and there was this troll infestation and all.
So I had to commandeer a second refrigerator and through my masculine guile and exerting my Man of the house power (ie.. begging) I was allowed to use it as my beer fridge / cellar.
I don’t even have the space for that, living in a tiny student flat as I do.
Myeck waters,
War of the gargantuas? I vaguely remember that movie…Wasn’t that originally intended as a sequal to ‘Frankenstein conquers the world’?
Is there any entertainment value in the video antigoodness posted? I’m speaking as someone who has watched War of the Gargantuas in its entirety.
Not really. It takes its own stereotypes too seriously. It’s essentially an extended “atheists are poopyheads.” SEE the amazing equation of atheism and faith! HEAR such great arguments for a god like, “My god really does exist!” BE ASTOUNDED by the lack of actual humor!
It’s pretty bad. And I’m speaking as someone who has watched Battlefield Earth in its entirety.
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:34 am
And I’m speaking as someone who has watched Battlefield Earth in its entirety.
You still had the deathray? Oh okay, I was starting to think I threw it away by accident… You haven’t seen my Giant Millipede of Doom by any chance, have you. I’m pretty sure I parked it next to the Infernal Aquarium of Certain Death, but it appears to have gone missing.
Louis:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:42 am
Rev BDC,
Is it wrong that I love you? If it helps, it’s a very shallow love…about the depth of a beer cellar! ;-)
You’re a man who takes his booze seriously, I respect that.
You’re a man who takes his booze seriously, I respect that.
Don’t get me started on whisk(e)y I might nerdgasm all over my office.
That would be hard to explain away.
The worst (or best) thing my doctor has done to me over the last few years was to give me a status report on the health of my liver as amazing and in fantastic shape.
I’m always up to a challenge.
Brownian:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:50 am
Having said this, I may have experienced tough times as a child, but I am quite sure I was much more of a nuisance to my parents than they were to me! Wouldn’t you agree…?
Yes, you are a terrible person, rajkumar.
Louis:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:57 am
Rev BDC, #70,
I received a similar challenge recently. I view it as an insult to my masculinity and shall be correcting with Jagermeister and self loathing this weekend.
Louis
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:01 am
Rev BDC, #70,
I received a similar challenge recently. I view it as an insult to my masculinity and shall be correcting with Jagermeister and self loathing this weekend.
Louis
Yes I’m on my way to the Asheville “Beer City” festival this weekend. I’m testing the hypothesis that I can float my way back to Charleston Sunday riding on my liver.
Emptyell:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:04 am
myeck waters
Is there any entertainment value in the video antigoodness posted? I’m speaking as someone who has watched War of the Gargantuas in its entirety.
Just in the meta sense of imagining the perspicacity level of anyone who could find it even remotely amusing or insightful. The pace is quite slow to make sure you don’t miss it’s utter lack of anything interesting.
If antigodless is all that’s left around here, and that’s the best ze can do, someone should go spelunking the fundie webs and do some recruiting. You can point out the great service they would be doing by bringing the good news to the benighted heathens. Truly a missionary calling.
That’s better than the restraining order I got from it last year.
Ogvorbis:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:18 am
Thank you for the beertalk. I enjoy. (Especially Belgian lambics).
Last week, I tried to describe Ommegang Three Philosophers to a man who drinks Coors Light.
Not sure why I tried. Apparently the idea of drinking beer for the taste is foreign to some.
theophontes 777:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:20 am
@ Hurinomyces bruxellensis
… namely that theists can appropriate our “fairytale” line and use it to call us names, but they cannot address our ideas.
I have noticed the same thing on the xtian sites I have been banned from. They are adopting our mannerisms but failing to take on our ideas.
(They have taken their mannerism to a high level of affectation. If you are bored, it is well worth prodding around on such sites and watching what crawls out of the woodwork. It is très drôle.)
@ nigel
yeast exists, and loves us.
All bow down before Almighty Phoenicia (PBUH)
@ pentatomid
student
My student diet revolved around Geuze, mosselen and haring. Omnomnom….
But the problem is that, having accepted that there is no free will, holding people accountable for their actions and punishing them feels fundamentally unjust
I agree. And maybe it should feel unjust. Maybe that’s best. Maybe people will be a little less cruel when they know the person being punished can’t actually deserve it.
If you haven’t checked out Smilansky on the shallowness of compatibilism, by the way, I think you’ll appreciate the heck out of it.
You, as a utilitarian, must be comfortable with that,
But I’m not comfortable with it, because I have a problem with the sacrifice of the individual. I don’t want to be sacrificed for the greater good, and fairness and empathy dictate that I cannot impose on anyone else something I would not accept for myself.
Yeah but don’t frame this as though it’s particularly a problem with utilitarianism. As you noted, it’s a problem with every justice system ever. And the alternative is to say to murderers “please don’t do that again” and then let them go.
Just don’t try this without building up your resistance first. Start with something relatively tame, like Deep Blue Sea or Reign of Fire (depending on your current level of resistance). Build up slowly until you can handle the third Spiderman movie. After that, I’d highly recommend a solid week of the original Battlestar Galactica or Buck Rogers (the 1980s version). You could also try the second season of Space: 1999.
After that, you are most likely ready for Battlefield: Earth.
Just don’t watch the video antigodless posted. Leave that one to the professionals.
theophontes 777:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:36 am
Oi ॐ! You xposted…. (But grab a beer now that you are here anyway.)
Uhm… Feeling a bit embarassed now… I actually liked Reign of Fire
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:52 am
*quietly sneaks off to look up mosselen
AHHH mussels!
bigbear:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:54 am
Crossposting for topicality:
ॐ :
Sure, but deontology works just as well for that.
No it wouldn’t, precisely because,
My reason for not going with anything deontological is that I can see the total made-up-edness of such projects and the apparent impossibility — since so many great thinkers now have tried and failed, I don’t imagine I can do better — of building any logical foundation for them.
I was trying to imply that when I said I understood its appeal. That consequentialism is, like you said, almost tautological as a foundational system for ethical action, since it is more rigorous and robust and empirico-rational than deontological or other systems. Though I admit I didn’t explicitly elaborate this, and left it as an unsaid assumption that only systems of thought that passed muster in this way are what I had in mind when I said “appealing”.
I have to read around a little more about the Knobe effect and evolution-of-intentions-as-heuristics hypothesis before I can say anything intelligent about them.
Anyway,
That only explains why we have these intuitions, though. It doesn’t follow that it’s actually more wrong to cause the same amount of pain deliberately or accidentally.
This is what vexes me about utilitarian evaluations. Sure, far as consequences are concerned, it makes not a smidgen of difference. But if “punishments” are going to be utilitarian in character, you would need to do almost virtually impossible ethical computations, in many cases if not all, while meting it out to actors who can not be innocent, due to their lack of intentionality. How fair would that be to the actor, even if it meant a world of good? How do you make that choice?
I am probably rehashing the same point, and you’d be perfectly in your right to “so what? thats how it is and if everyone saw that, they’d get with it and these vexations would fade away” me.
But I’m not so confident in our ability to run these sorts of ethical calculuses to rank utilitarianism above other systems, which are more sympathetic to these concerns and which do not require us to make impossible evaluations.
A coherent rule consequentialism won’t offer anything to say about intention either though. In any deontology, what matters is whether certain rules of action were followed, not why they were followed.
No, not if rules are set up based not only on consequential considerations but also encompass justice and fairness. In fact this is what sets rule consequentialism apart from other utilitarianisms.
And if its demonstrated that there are serious flaws in rule consequentialism, well there’s always pragmatic ethics.*shrugs*
We don’t have to be beholden to ethical systems that don’t pan out in the real world or systems that cause serious infractions on our moral intuitions which can’t be redressed by rational analyses.
theophontes 777:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:57 am
@ pentatomid
Don’t tell cicely, but the frieten are fried in horses fat.
Uhm… Feeling a bit embarassed now… I actually liked Reign of Fire
I totally enjoy Reign of Fire. It’s just that it’s not a very good movie, as far as most criteria for “good movies” go. The dialog is generally sub-par, the action is often illogical, and the resolution was completely contrived. I really enjoy it, in spite of those flaws.
My wife is the same way about Deep Blue Sea. That’s her Bad Movie Night movie — y’know, when the day has been so terrible, the only solution is chili cheese dogs with Fritos, and a bad movie.
theophontes 777:
May 30th, 2012 at 12:01 pm
@ bigbear
Sneaking a cross-post in here doesn’t necessarily mean you’ll get a free beer!
bigbear:
May 30th, 2012 at 12:05 pm
@ theophontes 777 :
Heh, I’m always prepared for such hijinks, so I bring my own.
I haven’t seen it in years but I loved Space: 1999 when it was in its first run. It was like someone had taken the worst element from the weakest episodes of Star Trek TOS and put them in a blender. Plus I was a huge fan of the Andersons’ crappy model work going way back.
The original Galactica, on the other hand, I never could take. Ugh. We were all excited when it premiered, and a local pizza parlor advertised that the were showing it on their giant screen TV, so we went – and the sheer awfulness of it drove us back out of the place.
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 12:23 pm
I totally enjoy Reign of Fire. It’s just that it’s not a very good movie, as far as most criteria for “good movies” go. The dialog is generally sub-par, the action is often illogical, and the resolution was completely contrived. I really enjoy it, in spite of those flaws.
My wife is the same way about Deep Blue Sea. That’s her Bad Movie Night movie — y’know, when the day has been so terrible, the only solution is chili cheese dogs with Fritos, and a bad movie.
Krull
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
May 30th, 2012 at 12:26 pm
I was trying to imply that when I said I understood its appeal. That consequentialism is, like you said, almost tautological as a foundational system for ethical action, since it is more rigorous and robust and empirico-rational than deontological or other systems.
Ah. I see your point.
But if “punishments” are going to be utilitarian in character, you would need to do almost virtually impossible ethical computations, in many cases if not all
I think this is a feature, not a bug. In deontology, arriving at the best rules is at least equivalently difficult (or in fact impossible), but these computations take place in an abstracted debate among elites, with the result that a set of rules comes “pre-packaged” for the punisher, who can simply do as instructed and then feel fair for carrying out the dictates of a procedural justice.
Utilitarianism confronts the punisher with the real difficulty instead of abstracting it away, and so may foster less self-righteousness and seemingly-justified gratuitous cruelty.
while meting it out to actors who can not be innocent, due to their lack of intentionality. How fair would that be to the actor, even if it meant a world of good? How do you make that choice?
There’s no better option, though. Any intentionality is ultimately caused by the initial conditions of the universe and subsequent random quantum effects. Everyone is ultimately innocent, because they couldn’t choose to choose otherwise, and yet we are apparently left with the necessity of punishing some, at least if we are going to have a civilization.
Saying “we are going to punish you even though you are incapable of deserving it” is at least honest.
But I’m not so confident in our ability to run these sorts of ethical calculuses to rank utilitarianism above other systems, which are more sympathetic to these concerns and which do not require us to make impossible evaluations.
Caring about intent produces injustices, though. If it results in harsher legal penalties for people with malicious intent, then we’re treating those people harshly for something they could not have chosen otherwise. Intent can only ultimately matter in a world with contra-causal free will, which of course can’t exist.
No, not if rules are set up based not only on consequential considerations but also encompass justice and fairness.
What can justice and fairness possibly mean if they don’t refer to just and fair outcomes?
Ooh, the hell with that! For some reason I thought it might be interesting because I heard it mentioned as some kind of a cult favourite, but I couldn’t stand 20 minutes of it. It started awful and got steadily worse. And not awful in the way some movies are so bad they’re good.
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 12:38 pm
Ooh, the hell with that! For some reason I thought it might be interesting because I heard it mentioned as some kind of a cult favourite, but I couldn’t stand 20 minutes of it. It started awful and got steadily worse. And not awful in the way some movies are so bad they’re good.
Yeah it’s easily one of the worst movies I’ve ever seen. But if for some sadistic reason the programming director at whatever buried in the dial cable channel I happen to be flipping by has it on, I find myself drawn to it.
:) That shrug is most appropriate! Pragmatic ethics have much to recommend them, and my thinking has been informed by Rorty, that’s why I was recently reading this, which I linked to this back in the Bruggencate/Hovind thread, around #102.
Pragmatism is great for its anti-foundationalism. The only problem is it doesn’t offer much in the way of determining “what is good”. Rorty didn’t think “what is good” is even a coherent question, except that it refers to whatever democratic debate arrives at — essentially it’s “democratic commant theory” as opposed to “divine command theory”.
That’s a refreshingly honest approach, but I’m not persuaded that something can be good just because people discussed it and decided it was good. I think we have a tendency to get those questions wrong. By taking the positively-valenced affects as the good, at least we can know what the democratic debate should be aiming for and why.
(But yeah, I’ve borrowed the descriptiveness of pragmatism for my aforementioned descriptive utilitarianism. I just think they neglected to note that there is a neurological answer to “what is good”.)
Maybe Relic Hunter-awful: bad acting, ridiculous script, and not even a hint of irony.
bigbear:
May 30th, 2012 at 1:56 pm
ॐ :
I think this is a feature, not a bug. In deontology, arriving at the best rules is at least equivalently difficult (or in fact impossible), but these computations take place in an abstracted debate among elites, with the result that a set of rules comes “pre-packaged” for the punisher, who can simply do as instructed and then feel fair for carrying out the dictates of a procedural justice.
I see what you’re getting at here and I concede you’re right about deontological rule making.
Less importantly, I think you’re a little off-keel to think deontological ethical debates have to be in the domain of elites any more or any less than those of any other system. It seems that way, but it isn’t really, atleast it doesn’t have to be, to qualify as deontological. We could be equally honest and describe in great detail to any interlocutors on why the rules were chosen.Or you could always publish regular despatches to the laity to keep them in the loop on the latest in Metaethics;I can see how that would catch on :)
Also more importantly, you’re addressing purely deontological systems here and not hybrids with consequentialism.
Caring about intent produces injustices, though. If it results in harsher legal penalties for people with malicious intent, then we’re treating those people harshly for something they could not have chosen otherwise. Intent can only ultimately matter in a world with contra-causal free will, which of course can’t exist.
Hmmm, this I had not considered. But I don’t see why knowing there’s no contra-causal free will can’t still inform our attitudes towards intentional transgressors in a non-consequentialist system as well, while simultaenuously avoiding injustices to accidental transgressors. Am I missing something here?
What can justice and fairness possibly mean if they don’t refer to just and fair outcomes?
Ah I see how by making it descriptive you’re trying to avoid some of the notoriously intractable problems with utilitarianism. But this is a little circular, no? A purely consequentialist system defines what a just a fair outcome is very differently from all other non-purely consequentialist systems. So which metric of fairness and justice do we use?
For instance, there’re many famous hypotheticals in the literature, where impossible choices between the interests of a few and interests of a multitude have to be made which illustrate problems with utilitarian calculations that don’t consider fairness and justice in the conventional sense, which isn’t – note, a purely utilitarian calculation of the greatest good for the greatest number.
:) That shrug is most appropriate! Pragmatic ethics have much to recommend them, and my thinking has been informed by Rorty, that’s why I was recently reading this, which I linked to this back in the Bruggencate/Hovind thread, around #102.
I’ve yet to readskim that link, thanks :)
I just think they neglected to note that there is a neurological answer to “what is good”.
LOL
Hurinomyces bruxellensis:
May 30th, 2012 at 1:57 pm
RBDC
Typically anything above 8% will age though there are some lower ABV styles that age well too. This is thrown out the window with super hoppy IPAs. They lose their flavor rapidly after being brewed due mainly to the hop volatility. Drink your big ass IPAs fresh.
I brew beer, and 7-8% is usually my dividing line between “keeping beer”, and beer that needs to be served quickly. Most of the brews I’ve made from a mashing process have been stable for at least 6 months, though. Beers made from malt extract seem to go stale after about 6 weeks. If I remember correctly, that’s almost irrespective of strength.
For some of the bigger brews I’ve made, the aging process is actually essential. I brewed a quad last summer that didn’t attenuate as well as I had hoped, and carbonated sluggishly during bottle conditioning. I was embarrassed of the beer about 6 weeks after brewing it; it was chewy and flat. After 8 months in the basement, its fully carbonated, dry enough to be palatable and actually gained some complexity.
Not correcting you there – just adding to the discussion.
Louis
For those not in the know lambic beer ages like wine ages.
With the exception of the sourness of lambics which is mostly caused by cultures of Lactobacillus species. After the initial fermentation lambics will continue to sour during subsequent aging, up to and beyond the point of being undrinkable. This is why lambics are typically aged to varying degrees and blended to make gueuze or with fruit to make the variety of fruit lambics. I think they tend to be more stable after blending, however some of the gueuze I’ve had in the states makes me wonder. In principle the yeast and bacteria shouldn’t die even if they go dormant over time.
Louis:
May 30th, 2012 at 2:34 pm
Hurinomyces bruxellensis,
I learned TWO things today, both about beer. This is exceptionally rare! A Red Letter day!
Still seeing only one side of the coin…. You are the other side, Brownian. Yan and Ying, or polar opposites, as it is commonly called. Get to know this and you’ll get a crystal clear understanding of why there are so many **irrational theists** in the world. Atheists like you define those theists… you cause them to exist.
That clown picture is the creepiest picture PZ has posted so far.
Walton:
May 30th, 2012 at 2:58 pm
If you haven’t checked out Smilansky on the shallowness of compatibilism, by the way, I think you’ll appreciate the heck out of it.
Thanks. That was really interesting, and directly on point. I’m not sure I’m completely convinced, though; my position is closer to what he terms “hard determinism”.
Walton:
May 30th, 2012 at 2:59 pm
Though I agree with the overwhelming majority of his article.
jonmilne:
May 30th, 2012 at 3:01 pm
I used to do that, too — attempt intellectual engagement with the clowns. I’m glad you’re taking that role here. While I hope you have better experiences than I, there is a good chance you’ll find what I found: folks like Raj don’t want the truth. They don’t want debate. They don’t want to explore their own ideas, however interesting or mundane.
They want to pontificate. They want to proselytize. They want you to tell them their thoughts are brilliant and original and insightful, and you are enlightened.
But I suspect you already know that, and are sincere in spite of Raj’s patent willful ignorance. In which case, you are a far more patient person than I.
I understand how you feel about the extent of Raj’s dishonesty. I suppose to me I’ve been trying the intellectual approach because I remember that I too used to be religious. Heck, many Pharyngulites as well as many other FTB members used to. So we all showed signs of intellectual dishonesty when it came to our faith in God right?
And yet I embraced secular rational reasoning, truly analysed my beliefs, and became an atheist. And you did. And many others here did. So I guess how I feel about it is that maybe I can do a good thing when I use intellect to try and sway members of the religious cults. So that I can give the same experience I had, the sense of freedom, where they aren’t constricted by Dark Age ideology and actually think outside the box.
There are two threads on the Atheist Experience – one about Kent Hovind’s phone calls from jail, and the other about how Twitter has shown just how screwed up the religious mindset is – that I find just too heartbreaking to read all of the comments of. Because the theists that show there all display some variant of not understanding how empathy and compassion work without needing God, and the whole “humans suck surely we need salvation” thing. Those comments on those threads really strengthened my desire to educate people on how atheist, secular, rational and humanist issues ACTUALLY work. :)
Jon
jonmilne:
May 30th, 2012 at 3:02 pm
Oh and that post was addressed at Nigelthebold, since it was his quote. Man do I hate it when I get lax about previewing posts and then make errors (rolls eyes) lol.
Hurinomyces bruxellensis:
May 30th, 2012 at 3:04 pm
Louis
I learned TWO things today, both about beer. This is exceptionally rare! A Red Letter day!
Thanks
No problem.
I’m an evangelical beer drinker; always happy to proselytize.
Atheists like you define those theists… you cause them to exist.
Those of you old enough to remember LPs, do you remember the sound of a record needle scraping all the way across an LP? That’s the sound that went through my mind.
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
May 30th, 2012 at 3:11 pm
bigbear,
Interesting reply, thanks! I’ll get back to you later — probably later today, USA time.
+++++
Walton,
I’m not sure I’m completely convinced, though; my position is closer to what he terms “hard determinism”.
If you mean his wonky attempt to mix compatibilism and hard determinism, yeah, I was not moved by that either. I just thought his criticisms of standard compatibilism were insightful.
Louis:
May 30th, 2012 at 3:30 pm
Wait…we atheists cause theists to exist?
{Sniffs}
I smell TROLLBAIT!!!!!!
{Ignores the bait}
Louis
jonmilne:
May 30th, 2012 at 3:43 pm
Raj:
You are the other side, Brownian. Yan and Ying, or polar opposites, as it is commonly called
If you’re going to cite a philosophical term, then at least get the fucking names right. It’s Yin and Yang, jeez louise at least do a Google search before you embarass yourself.
And I still want you to address posts #8 and #11 that I have posted in this thread.
Walton:
May 30th, 2012 at 3:51 pm
Yeah but don’t frame this as though it’s particularly a problem with utilitarianism. As you noted, it’s a problem with every justice system ever.
Yes, that’s true.
And the alternative is to say to murderers “please don’t do that again” and then let them go.
An important empirical question: how far does the existence of the threat of punishment for (certain) acts of violence actually reduce the occurrence of those acts of violence? And how far do the returns diminish as the severity of the threatened punishment increases?
This is a genuine question, not a rhetorical one. It’s hard to tell. It’s hard to tell even what a punishment-free society would look like; certainly there are societies without a functioning criminal justice system, but I’m not aware of one in which there are no retributive mechanisms at all (though I’m not an anthropologist and I could simply be ignorant on that subject).
If you’re going to cite a philosophical term, then at least get the fucking names right. It’s Yin and Yang, jeez louise at least do a Google search before you embarass yourself.
And yet I embraced secular rational reasoning, truly analysed my beliefs, and became an atheist. And you did.
The latest theist belief I had, I gave up at around seven years old or so. A horse broke my leg (well, really the ground did), and I was in a cast that immobilized me from the waist down. My Sunday School teacher came by with a present: a Kool-Aid canteen, one of those you got by trading in box-tops. I was really touched by her kindness in coming out to the farm to give me this little gift and chat with me, and I realized as we talked that I didn’t believe a single thing she said about Jesus or God. (Not that she invoked them a lot — she really was there just to check up on me, I think.)
I can look back now to some incidences preceding that time, and I realize I never really believed at all. What little belief I had was social.
I can hardly call the process I went through “rational.” More just, none of the stories made sense. Which is a different thing entirely. I mean, I can’t make heads nor tails of quantum mechanics, but it’s rational.
Those comments on those threads really strengthened my desire to educate people on how atheist, secular, rational and humanist issues ACTUALLY work.
I definitely understand the impulse. I used to react very much the same way — attempt to engage everyone in the hopes of spreading more enlightened understanding of exactly what atheism is.
I still try to engage pretty much everyone, to start off polite and civil. But the instant they stop responding to the things I say, and instead choose to interpret everything in some kind of straw-man version of atheism, I give up. Too many theists refuse the discussion.
There are enough that respond honestly, though, and those I’ll do my best to represent.
Aaaaanyway, as I said: I appreciate you taking on the role of the Civil Atheist. It’s an important role, one I used to assume proudly, many years ago. That frees me to be the humorous old curmudgeon. At least, I amuse myself.
And I still want you to address posts #8 and #11 that I have posted in this thread.
Those post are just too long for me. My memory ain’t so great. I would have already forgotten the first half of your post even before finishing the second half.
Those post are just too long for me. My memory ain’t so great. I would have already forgotten the first half of your post even before finishing the second half.
jonmilne, I present Exhibit A.
Louis:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:06 pm
Jon Milne,
And for all your efforts you got #117.
Not only is Raj incapable of delivering a cogent reply, he is uninterested. If I had the time I’d feel quite sorry for him.
Those of you old enough to remember LPs, do you remember the sound of a record needle scraping all the way across an LP? That’s the sound that went through my mind.
Yes. And this is exactly the reason why we are experiencing this communication gap. I was a teenager when CDs came out, or when they were invented. Even my father would have been a kid when people were listening to LPs.
Ichthyic:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:09 pm
Raj sez:
I learned how to take extreme stupidity without reacting to it.
And this is exactly the reason why we are experiencing this communication gap.
Uhm, no. First, people were still listening to LPs when CDs came out, so if you were a teenager, people were listening to LPs around that time.
Second, you’re the reason we’re experiencing this communication gap. I have a child younger than you, and we suffer no such communication problem. She’s married now (as of a month or so ago), and I have no problem communicating with her husband. Friends have children that are currently teenagers, and I have no problem communicating with them.
You refuse to communicate. You are intentionally obfuscating conversation. Your response at #119 pretty much proves this. Your refusal to actually engage in conversation is the problem.
You’re not that much younger than me, Kiddo. I was in my very early 20s when CDs came out.
Hurinomyces bruxellensis:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:14 pm
Raj
You are the other side, Brownian. Yan and Ying, or polar opposites, as it is commonly called. Get to know this and you’ll get a crystal clear understanding of why there are so many **irrational theists** in the world. Atheists like you define those theists… you cause them to exist.
Its amusing to see you admitting that Brownian has such control over your beliefs Raj.
You’re not that much younger than me, Kiddo. I was in my very early 20s when CDs came out.
And I guess this is precisely why we are speaking along the same lines. I was actually talking about some grumpy old men…
Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:20 pm
45s, LP’s, 8-track tape, reel to reel tape, cassette tapes, cds, and now mp3 players. Been there, done that, still have some.
Funny how Rajkumar can’t even get Yin and Yang right. That dates back to the ’60s when Eastern mysticism (read oriental stupidity for the gullible) invaded the hippy movement. Yawn, boring and wrong then, boring and wrong now. RK must not be very bright, as those aren’t big multisyllable words like nucleophilicity, that I deal with daily. No wonder he has trouble understanding what we write. We presume he can read above a third grade level.
Ichthyic:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:21 pm
Jon Milne,
And for all your efforts you got #117.
Not only is Raj incapable of delivering a cogent reply, he is uninterested. If I had the time I’d feel quite sorry for him.
remember this.
When you address the terminally stupid (like Raj), do recall that you should not expect a cogent response. You really are instead addressing onlookers, so tune your screeds accordingly. After all, the stupid will not pay any attention to how you word things anyway.
CDs are early eighties. I know, because I wasn’t born when they came out.
Ichthyic:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:24 pm
We presume he can read above a third grade level.
hey, FWIW, I DID ask for elementary level science teachers to see if they could better communicate basic science principles to Raj in the last iteration.
Ogvorbis:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:25 pm
Sorry. Grumpy old man.
Is there anyone who has been posting on The Zombie TZT Thread that Raj has not insulted?
Anyone?
Bueller?
Amphiox:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:26 pm
I learned how to take extreme stupidity without reacting to it
Only the grossly intellectually dishonest accept extreme stupidity without reacting to it.
You are the other side, Brownian. Yan and Ying, or polar opposites, as it is commonly called.
That is Yin and Yang, fapwit. And they are NOT polar opposites.
If you’re going to fap out Eastern Mysticism, at least make the effort to learn what that Eastern mysticism actually says.
Atheists like you define those theists… you cause them to exist.
Yin does NOT cause Yang to exist, nor does Yang “define” Yin, fapwit. If you’re going to fap out Eastern mysticism, at least make the effort to LEARN what that Eastern mysticism actually says and means.
Unsurprising that the fapwit remains too intellectually dishonest to bother learning things. If it won’t bother to learn about science, why should we expect it to make the effort to learn about Taoism, rather than take the lazy and easy route of fapping out the pop-culture bastardization of it.
Ichthyic:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:27 pm
No, early 90s. In early 80s, I was a little kid….literally.
meaning you don’t recall because you were a little kid.
Strange that Raj thinks he can change history because of the way HE remembers things. Reality doesn’t work that way, so sorry.
I also notice you haven’t denied you still live in your parent’s basement.
jonmilne:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:28 pm
Sorry. Grumpy old man.
“Old man”? Dude, I’m 23. I recognise your posting style is no better than a barely literate primary schooler’s, but that doesn’t make me old when I comment on it. Heck, you’re probably OLDER than me.
Those post are just too long for me. My memory ain’t so great. I would have already forgotten the first half of your post even before finishing the second half.
Okay, I take it back about how you saying “Where did I define God?” as being your most retarded statement ever. THIS now wins the prize.
Seriously, how can you forget any part of a post when all you need to do is copy and paste the entire posts that I made into the comment box, and then separate parts of the post with
tags so that you can address them individually? Hell, right above the comment box are instructions that can show you how to do exactly that.
Don’t you understand how you appear here? By continually refusing to address posts that thoroughly debunk the stuff that you have to have been saying, it shows a HUGE degree of intellectual dishonesty. Especially since you have requested that people go and read big long books that supposedly support your case, and at the same time also acting as if you are higher and mightier in your moral outlook than others here. If that was truly the case, you’d practice what you fucking preach, and actually address the comments that have been made that have torn apart the bullshit you’ve spouted.
I’m making one more request for you to please actually answer my posts. Otherwise, you’ll expose yourself as the ultimate contradictory hypocrite.
Yin does NOT cause Yang to exist, nor does Yang “define” Yin, fapwit. If you’re going to fap out Eastern mysticism, at least make the effort to LEARN what that Eastern mysticism actually says and means.
Sure it does. I can prove it you right here right now, but promise first that you won’t escape through your usual escape hatch, and/or start trolling using your many alter egos.
jonmilne:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:32 pm
Ugh, try again…
Sorry. Grumpy old man.
“Old man”? Dude, I’m 23. I recognise your posting style is no better than a barely literate primary schooler’s, but that doesn’t make me old when I comment on it. Heck, you’re probably OLDER than me.
Those post are just too long for me. My memory ain’t so great. I would have already forgotten the first half of your post even before finishing the second half.
Okay, I take it back about how you saying “Where did I define God?” as being your most retarded statement ever. THIS now wins the prize.
Seriously, how can you forget any part of a post when all you need to do is copy and paste the entire posts that I made into the comment box, and then separate parts of the post with blockquote tags so that you can address them individually? Hell, right above the comment box are instructions that can show you how to do exactly that.
Don’t you understand how you appear here? By continually refusing to address posts that thoroughly debunk the stuff that you have to have been saying, it shows a HUGE degree of intellectual dishonesty. Especially since you have requested that people go and read big long books that supposedly support your case, and at the same time also acting as if you are higher and mightier in your moral outlook than others here. If that was truly the case, you’d practice what you fucking preach, and actually address the comments that have been made that have torn apart the bullshit you’ve spouted.
I’m making one more request for you to please actually answer my posts. Otherwise, you’ll expose yourself as the ultimate contradictory hypocrite.
Amphiox:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:32 pm
My memory ain’t so great. I would have already forgotten the first half of your post even before finishing the second half.
The TAKE NOTES of the first half, fapwit, and refer back to them when you need to as you read the second half.
This is what INTELLECTUALLY HONEST people with memories that aren’t so great do if they want to engage HONESTLY in a discussion.
Alternately, you can admit that your memory troubles prevent you from properly participating in the discussion, shut up, and leave, fapwit. And not come back until your memory improves.
Ichthyic:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:35 pm
I can prove it you right here right now, but promise first that you won’t escape through your usual escape hatch, and/or start trolling using your many alter egos.
you can prove green is blue… blah blah inannity irrelevance stupidity… blah blah.
yes we’ve heard of your amazing powers of reason before. They fail to impress, o wise one-who-lives-in-his-parent’s-basement.
Amphiox:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:37 pm
and/or start trolling using your many alter egos
Trolling using sockpuppets is a serious offense on this blog, fapwit.
Provide EVIDENCE of this accusation, RIGHT NOW, with quotes and IP ADDRESSES, or APOLOGIZE for SLANDERING ME, RIGHT NOW, fapwit.
jonmilne:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:38 pm
nigel the bold – 118
Thank you for your kind words, although if my last post is any indication, I think I’m now swinging in the completely opposite direction of being civil – least with people who are the epitome of dishonesty like Raj.
Louis – 121
I’m still gonna try. It may be as futile as trying to stop Leeds United fans from doing Munich chants whenever they play Man Utd, but I still think it’s worth a go, even despite Raj’s turn for the insulting and hypocrisy against me now.
Those post are just too long for me. My memory ain’t so great. I would have already forgotten the first half of your post even before finishing the second half.
Only one such as Rajkumar would be proud of his laziness and intellectual dishonesty. Ugh, Raj, you’re a fucking embarassment.
you can prove green is blue… blah blah inannity irrelevance stupidity… blah blah.
yes we’ve heard of your amazing powers of reason before. They fail to impress, o wise one-who-lives-in-his-parent’s-basement.
No I can’t prove green is blue. But I can surely prove how yin defines yang. It’s easy. It’s called RELATIVITY. And, Just FYI, it is not something that is exclusive to ‘Eastern Mysticism’.
Louis:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:38 pm
Rajkumar,
Before Wiki? We had thins thing called “knowledge”. It came from “learning stuff” and “hard work” and “having a moderately high level functioning brain”. I realise these are foreign concepts to you, but I can draw you some excellent pictures in crayon and dribble to help you understand in a medium you are familiar with.
Louis
Louis:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:39 pm
Fuck! Typos!
Louis
jonmilne:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:43 pm
Aargh, quoting issues, jeez.
Ugh, try again…
Sorry. Grumpy old man.
“Old man”? Dude, I’m 23. I recognise your posting style is no better than a barely literate primary schooler’s, but that doesn’t make me old when I comment on it. Heck, you’re probably OLDER than me.
Those post are just too long for me. My memory ain’t so great. I would have already forgotten the first half of your post even before finishing the second half.
Okay, I take it back about how you saying “Where did I define God?” as being your most retarded statement ever. THIS now wins the prize.
Seriously, how can you forget any part of a post when all you need to do is copy and paste the entire posts that I made into the comment box, and then separate parts of the post with blockquote tags so that you can address them individually? Hell, right above the comment box are instructions that can show you how to do exactly that.
Don’t you understand how you appear here? By continually refusing to address posts that thoroughly debunk the stuff that you have to have been saying, it shows a HUGE degree of intellectual dishonesty. Especially since you have requested that people go and read big long books that supposedly support your case, and at the same time also acting as if you are higher and mightier in your moral outlook than others here. If that was truly the case, you’d practice what you fucking preach, and actually address the comments that have been made that have torn apart the bullshit you’ve spouted.
I’m making one more request for you to please actually answer my posts. Otherwise, you’ll expose yourself as the ultimate contradictory hypocrite.
Address them Raj. Failure to do so will make you officially the biggest laughing stock hypocrite dishonest troll of the entirety of Freethought Blogs, and the biggest laughing stock hypocrite dishonest troll in the history of ANY secular atheist site.
Amphiox:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:45 pm
Provide EVIDENCE for your claims against me, FAPWIT, with examples and IP ADDRESSES, RIGHT NOW, or admit that you are LYING and are SLANDERING ME, and apologize, RIGHT NOW.
Fapwit.
Ichthyic:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:45 pm
Trolling using sockpuppets is a serious offense on this blog, fapwit.
by “alter egos” I do believe the raj considers those responding to him to actually have 3d personalities, as opposed to his flatline one. IOW, he perceives the fact that we respond at different levels to different parts of his stupidity to be as if we were multiple personalities; or, in his words: responding with many “alter egos”.
He really IS a two dimensional personage. He finds it hard to imagine how a real brain that isn’t broken actually works.
It’s actually quite remarkable when you think about it.
Amphiox:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:46 pm
The fapwit’s ignorance of Relativity appears to be as vast as its ignorance of boobs.
Ichthyic:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:47 pm
But I can surely prove how yin defines yang. It’s easy. It’s called RELATIVITY.
exactly as predicted:
response included inane irrelevancy right off the bat.
Before Wiki? We had thins thing called “knowledge”. It came from “learning stuff” and “hard work” and “having a moderately high level functioning brain”. I realise these are foreign concepts to you, but I can draw you some excellent pictures in crayon and dribble to help you understand in a medium you are familiar with.
Louise, I can write the same about myself too. It’s easy. As I said before, just punch a few keys, and voila! By all means, keep glorifying your puny little self if it gives you a high.
If it were to ‘bright minds’ like you and your friends here, I am sure we’d still be burning women today for witch crafting, and things like cars, electricity, air planes, and medicines, would all be unheard of.
Amphiox:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:48 pm
He really IS a two dimensional personage. He finds it hard to imagine how a real brain that isn’t broken actually works.
To call the fapwit two-dimensional is a grievous slander against helpless, innocent hypocubes, who’ve done nothing to deserve such an association.
Amphiox:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:49 pm
Provide EVIDENCE of your slander, fapwit, with IP ADDRESSES, RIGHT NOW, or admit you were LYING, fapwit. RIGHT NOW.
No need for evidence. Your reaction is all what is needed. And I guess, now you and your alter egos are going to need some space to do your usual dirty work. So, I’ll leave. Happy trolling!
Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:51 pm
Before Wikipedia, how did you manage to communicate with each other?
Look, ignorant fuckwit thinks wiki is away to communicate with each other, not a resource.
Evidently it has never heard of other means for getting the news and information. Like newspapers, magazines, radio, tv, dictionaries, encyclopedias, libraries, books, atlases, etc. One wonders if its brain is filled with calcium hydroxyphosphate deposits.
Ichthyic:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:53 pm
Five bucks says Raj read “Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance” and got all mindblown.
Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:55 pm
No need for evidence.
With your lies and bullshit, you need to lead with evidence showing you aren’t a total and abject loser. Instead, you fap fuckwitted OPINION pretending it is anything other than nonsense.
Did Raj honestly say Happy Trolling? Seriously? What the devil is wrong with him.
Louis:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:55 pm
Raj,
If it were to ‘bright minds’ like you and your friends here, I am sure we’d still be burning women today for witch crafting, and things like cars, electricity, air planes, and medicines, would all be unheard of.
O RLY?
Please do elaborate! I really want to read this explanation. Spare no details.
if the devil existed, he wouldn’t have anything to do with Raj.
not enough material to work with.
And with all the hoggling he does, clearly his hands are not idle.
Nor are they particularly sanitary.
Tony:
May 30th, 2012 at 5:24 pm
Sure it does. I can prove it you right here right now, but promise first that you won’t escape through your usual escape hatch, and/or start trolling using your many alter egos.
In the process of proving, I wonder if this person intends to cite any sources or if we’re just supposed to accept anything presented at face value…
cm's changeable moniker:
May 30th, 2012 at 5:33 pm
[Aside]
Anyone remember those “household of the future” pieces from the 50s/60s/70s where technology would liberate us from drudgery and we’d use our copious free time to, I don’t know, read Chaucer, learn cello, grow bananas, or something?
Turns out they came true, but we just got to bash dolts on the web instead.
I want my future back.
(Yes, I know I could turn off the computer. Shush!)
Thank you for your kind words, although if my last post is any indication, I think I’m now swinging in the completely opposite direction of being civil – least with people who are the epitome of dishonesty like Raj.
That’s the key — the point in the discussion in which you decide the other person is open to actual discussion, or just wanting to preach and/or troll. It’s all a matter of how finely-tuned your sincere-o-meter. Too fine, and you get false positives. Not fine enough, and you end up spending time on people who are not worth the effort.
All of us here are tuned differently. I’m becoming less patient as the years go by, and hardly give them the benefit of the doubt, as the odds are stacked heavily against them.
But then, you’re barely over half my age. I suspect you’re not nearly as jaded as I. That’ll come with age, and at that point, you can respect and enjoy the new up-and-comers who have the patience to engage folks like raj.
Did Raj honestly say Happy Trolling? Seriously? What the devil is wrong with him.
He just bought a 5MW projector and has been dying to use it.
kemist, Dark Lord of the Sith:
May 30th, 2012 at 5:44 pm
If it were to ‘bright minds’ like you and your friends here, I am sure we’d still be burning women today for witch crafting, and things like cars, electricity, air planes, and medicines, would all be unheard of.
Whereas if it were left to minds like yours, I guess we’d be left wondering what’s the meaning of “greenness” while contemplating boobs.
That’d help us design cars, drugs and airplanes, no doubt.
Amphiox:
May 30th, 2012 at 5:58 pm
And don’t forget, kemist, that it would JUST be contemplating, not touching, the boobs. Because contemplating is a yin activity, while touching is yang, and one must create the other, but polar opposites can never the twain meet. (And the raj has significant experience only in one of them).
Hence no babies (but also no need for cars, drugs, or airplanes).
Whereas if it were left to minds like yours, I guess we’d be left wondering what’s the meaning of “greenness” while contemplating boobs.
That’d help us design cars, drugs and airplanes, no doubt.
What’s wrong with ‘contemplating’ boobs? It’ all part of human sexuality. Quite natural. Nothing more unusual than saying I love the colour purple, or I like music.
This is true, Kesmit. A red/green colourblind person doesn’t know what the colour green looks like. Forget the science behind colour perception for a second. If I was a red/green colourblind person, and I asked you to explain and describe this colour so I could visualize it in my mind, how would you do that?
The Laughing Coyote (Canis Sativa):
May 30th, 2012 at 6:27 pm
Jonmilne:
Okay, I take it back about how you saying “Where did I define God?” as being your most retarded statement ever. THIS now wins the prize.
You’re doing good, and I’m not personally offended by ‘retarded’, but watch the ableist stuff, please and thankyou.
And I guess this is precisely why we are speaking along the same lines. I was actually talking about some grumpy old men…
No no no. You miss my point (and ignore most of my post).
If you were a teen during the early ’90s, you’re only a decade younger than me. Your father would’ve grown up with the LP, and 8-tracks and later cassette tapes. You would’ve been a child during the final heyday of the LP, not your father. I certainly remember the scratch of the needle as it skittered across vinyl from my late teens, which would’ve made you almost 10.
But then, I have a memory that spans more than half-a-post. That might explain it.
There is no significant generation gap to excuse the lack of communication. There is no generation gap. You are not part of a generation with privileged information denied us old fogeys. There’s nothing special about your education that would impede communication with us old folks.
You seem to write in fairly grammatical sentences. Your paragraphs (when you write in full paragraphs) seem to be fairly cohesive. This suggest the actual communication problem is you.
In fact, it would seem to suggest one of these options:
1) You have nothing to communicate, but insist on posting
2) You don’t wish to communicate anything worthwhile, though you could
3) You don’t know how to communicate full concepts or ideas
4) You wish to communicate, but are afraid your ideas will be heartlessly dismantled and your feelings will be hurt
5) You are here just to see what kind of reaction you can stir up
Of those, I am only sympathetic to #3.
There may be options I have not included. If so, I’m more than willing to entertain alternate options explaining why you are impeded communication. But to do that, you’d have to actually attempt to communicate.
TL;DR (in case the preceding was too long to remember the beginning at the end): You’re not younger than many of us, so stop trying to use that as an excuse. You are the impediment to communication. Either you’re stupid, scared, or trolling.
If I was a red/green colourblind person, and I asked you to explain and describe this colour so I could visualize it in my mind, how would you do that?
I was going to use that example in an earlier post, but decided against it.
Instead, here’s a more important part of your post:
Forget the science behind colour perception for a second.
Why would you do that?
Consider: the actual perception of the color green is a metaphysical statement. I can say, “You know how you can see different things in different brightnesses? I perceive three different brightnesses where you perceive only one. I can’t really describe those differences. I’m only describing my perception.”
Now, that’s a pretty bold statement. One might be tempted to equate that with the perception of God, or ghosts, or UFOs.
But.
I can also say, “I can prove it.” (This would be epistemology, or “How we know things.”) And then I would use science to do so. After doing some experiments with the spectrometer and different shades of various colors that all look the same in black and white, I would be able to convince a colorblind person that I actually do perceive more of the spectrum than they.
It’s really a trivial experiment.
So when you say, “Forget the science for a moment,” you are attempting to eradicate the line between metaphysics and epistemology. You are trying to eliminate the dividing line between assertion and knowledge. Sure, it’s difficult to describe the color green. But at least we can explain there is a difference, demonstrate what the difference is, and show how we know there is a difference.
And that’s a helluva lot.
Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:
May 30th, 2012 at 6:55 pm
What’s wrong with ‘contemplating’ boobs? It’ all part of human sexuality.
Gentlemen, which leaves you out, do it in private and surreptitiously. Only fuckwitted losers like you make a deal out of it.
If I was a red/green colourblind person, and I asked you to explain and describe this colour so I could visualize it in my mind, how would you do that?
It doesn’t matter. It doesn’t prove anything other than language is a product of the human experience. If you think it means anything else, cite the literature to back up your claim, and use language like “this is what I think, and this (link to said evidence) is the evidence to back it up”. Otherwise, all you have is a failure of language, nothing more, and definitely not the imaginary deity you are trying to place there. It says nothing at all about your lack of evidence for your imaginary deity, which is nothing but a delusion in your mind…Put up or shut the fuck up loser.
cm's changeable moniker:
May 30th, 2012 at 7:16 pm
(Notes in passing that Raj has yet to post in a language other than English.)
*waves at CR*
kemist, Dark Lord of the Sith:
May 30th, 2012 at 7:19 pm
Forget the science behind colour perception for a second.
Why would I do that.
The only interesting thing that can be learned out of subjective experiences is how the brain works.
The rest is just the idiotic ramblings of people who only think about things and never test their reasoning to see if it fits with the real world.
If I was a red/green colourblind person, and I asked you to explain and describe this colour so I could visualize it in my mind, how would you do that?
Beyond pointing to a spectrometer and proving that I can differentiate two wavelenghts that he cannot and that this machine, which has a better light detector than us both can also detects the difference ?
Nothing.
It’s pointless. It’s not his brain that’s defective, it’s his eyes.
Beyond pointing to a spectrometer and proving that I can differentiate two wavelenghts that he cannot and that this machine, which has a better light detector than us both can also detects the difference ?
Nothing.
Terrorist fist jab.
Damn straight, my friend.
See this, raj? We all pretty much have the same answer. It’s science that sets our knowledge apart from yours.
Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:
May 30th, 2012 at 7:50 pm
Where’s your evidence to back up your fuckwitted and silly question Rajkumar? One would think you are nothing but a reality bereft druggie without a coherent thought in what’s left of your mind. Put up or shut the fuck up with real evidence. I’ll even link to where to find it, so your only excuse is you tacitly ceding to us the argument.
Amphiox:
May 30th, 2012 at 8:13 pm
Another post from the fapwit, another post with no IP address to back up its slanderous accusations, another post without an apology for slandering.
Another tacit admission of LYING.
Fapfap.
Amphiox:
May 30th, 2012 at 8:13 pm
Forget the science behind colour perception for a second.
NO.
Amphiox:
May 30th, 2012 at 8:18 pm
If I was a red/green colourblind person, and I asked you to explain and describe this colour so I could visualize it in my mind, how would you do that?
Take one green card and one yellow card, point to the green one and say “this one is green”.
Done, fapwit.
The additional fact that the red/green colourblind person won’t be able to distinguish green from red is a separate issue and also irrelevant.
For starters, you would, or could, do that because it has absolutely no relevance whatsoever to the questions I have been asking you. However, if you are trying to impress your friends here, well, may be you have impressed them after all, because every time one of you parrots some information from Wikipedia, it leaves the rest of you highly impressed. Apparently!
Beyond pointing to a spectrometer and proving that I can differentiate two wavelenghts that he cannot and that this machine, which has a better light detector than us both can also detects the difference ?
That wouldn’t explain anything about the ‘greenness’ of the colour green — it would only explain how humans perceive colours. The same old high school science, and the same old Wikipedian arsenal. Your (so-called) high-tech scientific explanations won’t explain a thing about what the colour green actually looks like to those who can see it.
To understand this better, I ask you the same question again. How about visualizing the colour ultra-violet? Can you visualize this colour by going the high school science of colour perception?
Gentlemen, which leaves you out, do it in private and surreptitiously. Only fuckwitted losers like you make a deal out of it.
Gentlemen, who secretly watch porn, and publicly praise the breasts of their wives? No, I have got something that suits you better. Dirty Old Scoundrel. DOS.
chigau (違う):
May 30th, 2012 at 9:07 pm
What color are the ‘go’ traffic lights in Japan?
(Hint: same as Australia)
What is that color called?
Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:
May 30th, 2012 at 9:11 pm
No citations from Rajkumar. He tacitly agrees his evidenceless argument is bullshit. Nothing but lies and bullshit. He can change this by citing the literature at any time…or shutting the fuck up like the evidenceless loser it is…
Amphiox:
May 30th, 2012 at 9:16 pm
Two more posts. Still no IP addresses. Still no apologies.
Two more admissions of LYING by the fapwit.
And more worthless fapping about on pointless, useless, already debunked points.
Fapfapfap.
John Morales:
May 30th, 2012 at 9:31 pm
The specimen bleats*: In early 80s, I was a little kid….literally.
Presumably, now it’s literally a goat.
(Ain’t the internet wonderful?
On the internet, no-one knows that you’re a…
…
Ah, never mind)
–
* Literally, by its own claim. :)
kemist, Dark Lord of the Sith:
May 30th, 2012 at 9:44 pm
For starters, you would, or could, do that because it has absolutely no relevance whatsoever to the questions I have been asking you.
That’s ’cause your questions make no freaking sense. I told you that more than 100 posts ago. But appearently you insist on thinking your pointless philosophical masturbation has deep meaning.
However, if you are trying to impress your friends here, well, may be you have impressed them after all, because every time one of you parrots some information from Wikipedia, it leaves the rest of you highly impressed. Apparently!
Fapwikipediafap.
Lalala I can’t hear you, because wikipedia, high school science, blabla.
That wouldn’t explain anything about the ‘greenness’ of the colour green — it would only explain how humans perceive colours.
“Greenness” only exists in human heads, you bottomless idiot.
That’s been the point we’ve been trying to make since the very beginning, and that you refuse to address.
“Greenness” is a product of our brains and has nothing to do with the true nature of anything except with the functionning of the brain. To think about it without addressing how the brain produces it is pointless mental masturbation that will never bring new useful knowledge since it has no link to the real world.
FossilFishy (Lobed-finned Killer of Threads):
May 30th, 2012 at 10:05 pm
I awoke this morning with the memory of a young lady towards whom I had acted quite beastly almost twenty years ago. It wasn’t malice exactly, just the callow ineptitude of youth. That memory has soured my day in such a way that I wish I could somehow apologize and make amends. But then here comes Raj once again, riding a big old train ‘o stupid.
That wouldn’t explain anything about the ‘greenness’ of the colour green
I actually slapped my thigh as I laughed at that; I never do that!
Sure, I still feel sad that the more enlightened me cannot go back and stop my idiot youthful self from being a such an asshole, but thanks to Raj I once again realise that at least I’m capable of learning.
Hurinomyces bruxellensis:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:08 pm
For starters, you would, or could, do that because it has absolutely no relevance whatsoever to the questions I have been asking you.
This is either a lie or a willful misunderstanding. The question if I remember is about whether we could detect god in some way without having a prior definition of him.
The facts are that we:
1) can measure things we can’t sense directly
2) have discovered things well outside of our common experience (again with the electron example)
3) have no evidence from any science that seems to be leading toward a god. The universe works just fine without that stupid thing.
That wouldn’t explain anything about the ‘greenness’ of the colour green — it would only explain how humans perceive colours.
And what is “greenness” but perception of a physical attribute?
You talk as if there were something inherently unique about “greenness,” as if it were distinct from its spectrum. But that’s the point. We define green by our perception. Or we can define it by its spectrum. Either way works out the same.
Your question is based in the supposition that our perception is not tied to the physical attributes that define the limits of “green.” It’s your supposition that is wrong, not the problem of defining “green.”
The same old high school science, and the same old Wikipedian arsenal. Your (so-called) high-tech scientific explanations won’t explain a thing about what the colour green actually looks like to those who can see it.
And?
Trying to explain the experience of an orgasm won’t do it justice to someone who has never experienced it. Trying to explain the flavor of alligator won’t do it justice to anyone who has not tasted chicken.
Big deal.
These are all subjective experiences. Both of these are far harder to quantize than trying to explain the color green (which has an analog to anyone who can see in at least grey tones). And again: big deal.
So, what’s your point? That there’s some sort of parallel between these things and the experience of God?
If so, you have a long row to hoe. You have to identify the proper source of the feeling of divinity. For instance, it might just be the thought of a nipple in your mouth that makes your penis all tingly, and not the presence of God. Or maybe you’re fucking high as a NOAA weather balloon.
The color “green” can be associated with great certainty to a certain spectrum. (You know that “science” you’d like us to ignore? Sorry, we can’t. It’s what allows us to be sure of our knowledge, such as what constitutes the color “green.”)
In direct contrast, your perception of a god cannot be correlated with anything other than various mental states. The same kind of states that have been associated with other hallucinatory experiences.
So forgive me if I don’t allow you to disregard science. It’s the bit that allows us to distinguish reality from fantasy, fact from fiction. If you wish to continue to believe only what you desire to believe, then feel free. But it’s quite disingenuous of you to think we should accept your fantasies as reality.
Especially when the best defense you can muster has something to do with our inability to describe “green,” when in fact we can both describe it, and define it.
Can you define “god?”
Amphiox:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:00 pm
“Greenness” is NOT a thing to be described, it is a quality used to describe things in reality – namely things that emit or reflect electromagnetic radiation of a certain range of wavelengths (or the radiation itself).
It is NOT a reality to be or that can be described. It is a DESCRIPTION of reality.
The fapwit’s perseveration in demanding a description of a descriptive term simply demonstrates that the fapwit doesn’t have functional language capacity, in ANY language, first, second, third, or eighteenth.
It doesn’t know the difference between nouns and adjectives.
Either that, or it is perpetrating just another one of its tired, dishonest “pranks”.
Amphiox:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:04 pm
Your (so-called) high-tech scientific explanations won’t explain a thing about what the colour green actually looks like to those who can see it.
It doesn’t need to.
To explain what the colour green looks like to those who can see it requires just one word. One word which, upon reading it, anyone who can see green will INSTANTLY know and understand exactly what green looks like, which is ALL that an explanation in human language is required to do.
That one word is “green”.
The fapwit is just wasting its and our time fapping about this ridiculously pitiful and worthless tangent.
Snoof:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:09 pm
Can you define “god?”
Xe can, but he won’t. And xe acts like this proves something.
Xe can, but he won’t. And xe acts like this proves something.
Oh, it proves something all right.
Just not what xe wishes it would. It’s like yan and ying, y’know?
Lyn M, Purveyor of Fine Aphorisms of Death:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:50 pm
@ Ogvorbis #136
Is there anyone who has been posting on The Zombie TZT Thread that Raj has not insulted?
Anyone?
He’s missed me so far. I’m thinking it’s because he realises that I am a woman, and then he thinks that means I have breasts, and then his teensy brain melts down and flows out his ears.
“Greenness” only exists in human heads, you bottomless idiot.
That’s been the point we’ve been trying to make since the very beginning, and that you refuse to address.
“Greenness” is a product of our brains and has nothing to do with the true nature of anything except with the functionning of the brain. To think about it without addressing how the brain produces it is pointless mental masturbation that will never bring new useful knowledge since it has no link to the real world.
Yes. True. And once again, no one is concerned with how the human brain produces ‘greenness’. It’s a completely different discussion. COMPLETELY DIFFERENT in CAPITALS and bold.
Now, we are concerned with this:
First, a red/green colour blind person is someone who has never seen the colour green, and because the person has never seen the colour, he doesn’t know what ‘green’ looks like in its ‘original form’. To see the colour in its ‘original form’ means, seeing the colour with a normal colour vision.
Now suppose such a person would like to know what the green colour looks like in its ‘original form’. Suppose you have a normal colour vision, and I am such a red/green colour blind person. I ask you to ‘describe’ this colour to me in any way you like — even using your high school science — so I am able to get a picture of what seeing this colour is like in its original form. How would you do that? Do you think you would be able to do that by telling me the wavelength of this colour, and a little bit about the colour spectrum from here and there?
And, yes, my questions are not going to make any sense if you have no damn clue how to answer them. But I see, you are on the same frequency now as the rest of your group. Looks like you all have the same dictionary.
Lyn M, Purveyor of Fine Aphorisms of Death:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:53 pm
No need for evidence. Your reaction is all what is needed. And I guess, now you and your alter egos are going to need some space to do your usual dirty work. So, I’ll leave. Happy trolling!
tl;dr = I know same as about god. You just have a limited mind.
You are the other side, Brownian. Yan and Ying, or polar opposites, as it is commonly called.
Oh Lordy, you are going to start dry humping Oriental Philosophy next?
@ Ichthyic
“Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance”
Summation in one sentence:
Technology is here to stay, get used to it.
Anyone?
@ cm’s changeable moniker
(Notes in passing that Raj has yet to post in a language other than English.)
Good point. Reminds me of danielhaven pretending to be Afrikaans.
@ Humpty-Dumpty
Looks like you all have the same dictionary.
LOL
Ichthyic:
May 31st, 2012 at 12:14 am
you are going to start “dry humping” Oriental Philosophy next?
yes, that’s exactly the right imagery.
Ichthyic:
May 31st, 2012 at 12:19 am
Because contemplating is a yin activity, while touching is yang
well, yan and ying, according to Raj, and of course, with THOSE one generates the other, so contemplation necessarily generates touching, and to touch the breast then forces you into contemplation… which forces you to touch… contemplate… touch…con…touch… *fizzle* *spark*
*wheeeeeeezzzeeee*
Hurinomyces bruxellensis:
May 31st, 2012 at 12:26 am
First, a red/green colour blind person is someone who has never seen the colour green, and because the person has never seen the colour, he doesn’t know what ‘green’ looks like in its ‘original form’. To see the colour in its ‘original form’ means, seeing the colour with a normal colour vision.
How do you even know we experience the color green the same way? You are assuming that my sensation of green is the same as yours, but we can’t compare that directly. What I can do is name some sensation I get from looking at the grass so that we have a consistent word for it, and then investigate the physical phenomenon that causes that sensation. We can’t directly communicate our ‘original forms’ of green to each other any more than we can communicate them to my dad, who is colorblind.
Your platonic form for the experience of green an invalid abstraction based on an unwarranted assumption. Its the physical phenomenon that is primary to what “green” is and not our sensory experience.
Or, put it differently, Kemist, the brain of a red/green colour blind person cannot generate ‘greenness’, because the input it is receiving from the eyes about colours is not complete. Now, do you know a way to make the brain of a red/green colour blind person generate ‘greenness’?
I thought ‘mental masturbation’ wasn’t much appreciated here?
Hurinomyces bruxellensis:
May 31st, 2012 at 12:34 am
I thought ‘mental masturbation’ wasn’t much appreciated here?
Well then let me make my response shorter. Your ‘original form’ is meaningless. Its a neat trick we got from evolution to help us tell if the fruit is ripe.
“Green” would still exist even if no one could see it, we just wouldn’t have a special name for it.
Ichthyic:
May 31st, 2012 at 12:34 am
Now, do you know a way to make the brain of a red/green colour blind person generate ‘greenness’?
you do realize that a color blind person still generates a grey value for the color they are not processing?
oh wait, you haven’t a clue how any of this works, even at an elementary school level.
Four more faps from the fapwit. No IP addresses to support its sockpuppetry accusation. No apologies for slander.
Four more admissions of lying.
Fapfap.
Guy:
May 31st, 2012 at 12:55 am
Just lurking around and saw this
“A red/green colourblind person doesn’t know what the colour green looks like.”
this is not actually true. A red/green colourblind person is perfectly capable of seeing green and distinguishing it from other colours, just like she/he is able to see red. Even if you put a red object next to a green object they would be able to tell which is green and which is red.
The problem for a red/green colourblind person comes when you take different shades of green and red and mix them together, then they are unable to see which is which.
I know this because I am red/green colourblind.
This does not actually take anything away from the point of the original post, just thought you may find that of interest (or not).
theophontes 777:
May 31st, 2012 at 12:57 am
Bible quote of the day:
Mark 16: 17-18 reads, “And these signs shall follow them that believe: In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues. They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.”
And this is taken literally:
“Anybody can do it that believes it,” Wolford said. “Jesus said, ‘These signs shall follow them which believe.’ This is a sign to show people that God has the power.”
If only more xtians had the courage to actually follow the babble!
Amphiox:
May 31st, 2012 at 1:01 am
you do realize that a color blind person still generates a grey value for the color they are not processing?
The three opsins in humans DON’T, point of fact, just register “red”, “green”, or “blue”, like some computer. Each one has a continuous and broad absorption spectrum. EACH ONE actually covers almost the entire visible spectrum, but they just have different peak response.
The brain integrates the varying INTENSITY of the response from each of the cone opsins when stimulated by any particular wavelength of light, and produces the subjective sensation of color from this.
As you can see, the “red” opsin actually peaks in YELLOW in humans, and is actually kind of pissy at detecting red wavelengths.
And the one of the other opsins, and rod rhodopsin, which red-green colour blind people have, both actually PEAK in the green.
Red green colour-blind people see colours the same way most mammals (except Old World Monkeys, Apes, and some New World Monkeys) do.
They absolutely CAN see green, and CAN distinguish even shades of green.
They can, in fact, distinguish green from practically EVERYTHING except certain shades of red, and vice versa.
Amphiox:
May 31st, 2012 at 1:04 am
Note that the fapwit, in continuing to fap on about describing “greenness”, has deliberately ignored my comment about how green is NOT an object in reality to be described, but a DESCRIPTION of the properties of objects in reality.
It is fundamentally dishonest to ask anyone to describe a description.
It is even more fundamentally dishonest to ignore it when one is called out on it.
But we already knew the fapwit was a pitiful intellectually dishonest liar.
Fapfap.
Amphiox:
May 31st, 2012 at 1:08 am
this is not actually true. A red/green colourblind person is perfectly capable of seeing green and distinguishing it from other colours, just like she/he is able to see red. Even if you put a red object next to a green object they would be able to tell which is green and which is red.
The problem for a red/green colourblind person comes when you take different shades of green and red and mix them together, then they are unable to see which is which.
this is not actually true. A red/green colourblind person is perfectly capable of seeing green and distinguishing it from other colours, just like she/he is able to see red. Even if you put a red object next to a green object they would be able to tell which is green and which is red.
The problem for a red/green colourblind person comes when you take different shades of green and red and mix them together, then they are unable to see which is which.
I know this because I am red/green colourblind.
The red/green colour blind person cannot see green as green would be seen by someone with normal colour vision. A red/green colour blind would see green as shades of yellow, blue, and red/brown. Sometimes even black. This is why red/green colour blind get very confused when they see yellow-green, blue-green, and murky green. The colour blind people I know of, for them, yellow-green is seen as pure yellow, blue green is seen as pure blue, and murky green is seen as red/brown or even black. Pure green, such as fresh grass, gets confused with colours like orange, light brown, and yellow.
Guy:
May 31st, 2012 at 2:15 am
Bollocks!!!! don’t tell me what red/green colour blind people see colours as, I am colour blind. I’ve had this discussion with people before, they show me colours and ask me what they are, I answer and its the same colour they see. Its only when you take shades of colours and mix them with shades of other colours that a problem arises. Look at the standard colour blindness test, that what they do – mix up shades of colours and hide shapes in there.
Lyn M, Purveyor of Fine Aphorisms of Death:
May 31st, 2012 at 2:17 am
Guy, Guy, Guy, don’t be upset. You just don’t understand that raj knows everything. So your reply is not going to be of use. Merely because it is factual in no way influences old raj there.
Guy:
May 31st, 2012 at 2:22 am
whoops, bit of a blockquote fail. Meant to have this before what was posted
The red/green colour blind person cannot see green as green would be seen by someone with normal colour vision. A red/green colour blind would see green as shades of yellow, blue, and red/brown. Sometimes even black. This is why red/green colour blind get very confused when they see yellow-green, blue-green, and murky green. The colour blind people I know of, for them, yellow-green is seen as pure yellow, blue green is seen as pure blue, and murky green is seen as red/brown or even black. Pure green, such as fresh grass, gets confused with colours like orange, light brown, and yellow.
echidna:
May 31st, 2012 at 2:29 am
They can, in fact, distinguish green from practically EVERYTHING except certain shades of red, and vice versa.
This is true for my red/green colour-blind husband, except that he also cannot distinguish some shades of green from greys of the same tone.
Hurinomyces bruxellensis:
May 31st, 2012 at 2:30 am
What exactly is wrong with you people? Why can’t you understand something so simple?
Because we care about the way reality actually works, rather than the way its supposed to work according to your weirdly distorted simplification. I understand what you are saying, I just dispute your assertion that it illustrates anything useful about reality.
You are implying that our perception of green is of primary importance to our understanding of green, and that is false.
You are assuming that all people who aren’t classified as color blind see green the same way, and that is unsubstantiated.
If you look at the video I linked, you will see that members of the Himba tribe appear to develop a different perception of color than we have, based on the categories they have invented to classify it. That doesn’t change the fact that we all experience the same physical phenomenon of visible light.
I’m betting you’d have problems keeping up with various species of small rodents.
True. My rats could think circles around Misogyniraj all day long and into the night.
Lyn M, Purveyor of Fine Aphorisms of Death:
May 31st, 2012 at 2:37 am
Waits with bated breath for raj to ‘splain everything OR say it was a joke OR change the subject
Which will it be?
Lyn M, Purveyor of Fine Aphorisms of Death:
May 31st, 2012 at 2:42 am
Oh dang! I forgot he might flounce! Again.
echidna:
May 31st, 2012 at 2:47 am
I know this is old ground, but I’m sure it’s worth saying again.
“Green” light is light of wavelength ~ 560–490 nm. Our perception of “green” will vary according to the ability of our eyes to perceive it, and subsequent processing that goes on inside the brain.
If we were all blind, there would still be “green” light, and we would still be able to measure it with appropriate instruments, because it’s defined as something corresponding to a property of reality (to paraphrase Amphiox badly).
Raj is trying to use the limitations of language and perception to invoke mysticism. It won’t work here.
jonmilne:
May 31st, 2012 at 2:48 am
nigelthebold
That’s the key — the point in the discussion in which you decide the other person is open to actual discussion, or just wanting to preach and/or troll. It’s all a matter of how finely-tuned your sincere-o-meter. Too fine, and you get false positives. Not fine enough, and you end up spending time on people who are not worth the effort.
All of us here are tuned differently. I’m becoming less patient as the years go by, and hardly give them the benefit of the doubt, as the odds are stacked heavily against them.
But then, you’re barely over half my age. I suspect you’re not nearly as jaded as I. That’ll come with age, and at that point, you can respect and enjoy the new up-and-comers who have the patience to engage folks like raj.
Yeah, at this point I just feel like goading the guy into breaking a rule. Like saying to him “Hey Raj, that lovely Mr PZ Myers just told me to tell you that you’re allowed to post elsewhere on Pharyngula now. I know this because PZ is planning to create ‘Post of the Month’ and ‘Poster of the Month’ awards on his site, and I’m totally a shoo-in to win both of those awards so you can totally trust what I’m saying!”
Admittedly, that’s not actually true, although it would be helluva funny if Raj took that as true and then started posting elsewhere on the site based on my word and then got banhammered for it.
Although that said, I would like it if PZ did actually do “Post of the Month” and “Poster of the Month” awards for his site. Some healthy competition amongst us guys would be some pretty damn cool stuff.
jonmilne:
May 31st, 2012 at 2:50 am
Laughing Coyote:
<blockquoteYou’re doing good, and I’m not personally offended by ‘retarded’, but watch the ableist stuff, please and thankyou.
Yeah, my bad on that. I’ll just refer to him as a Mind Blowingly Stupid Fapwit (TM) from now on. :)
jonmilne:
May 31st, 2012 at 2:53 am
Amphiox:
The raj vs Reality, round 1984.
Current score: Reality 1984, Raj 0.
If only Room 101 existed, then we could put Raj there… :)
Although that said, I would like it if PZ did actually do “Post of the Month” and “Poster of the Month” awards for his site. Some healthy competition amongst us guys would be some pretty damn cool stuff.
Raj, you’re still adapting a “higher and mightier” attitude with regards to your posts. Prove it. Practice what you preach. Actually address the posts that have been actively ripping apart what you have to say. For once in your life show some intellectual honesty.
Post 8 of this thread reloaded:
I really hate to be the one that’s going to end up doing the biggest pwnage of Raj yet again – I mean, not to blow my own trumpet, but I was the one who lead him into asking his most stupid question ever on this site, namely “Where did I define God?” – but on the other hand I’m a massive egotist and having a whole bunch of people praise me on ruthlessly I burned him last time has turned out to be a massively alluring factor in tempting me to massively pwn him again:
Raj, with regards to this God that you’ve posited on this site, does it actually make ANY difference whatsoever whether we believe in it or not? Like, for instance, do you think that us non-believers will be doomed to an eternity in hell if we don’t believe, while thinking that believers like yourself will be granted with life in heaven? This is a hook of many of the mainstream religions in order to attract followers, which namely takes the form of what I like to call the “Reward/Punishment Gambit”. Speaking as an ex-Christian, I can testify to the basic effectiveness of this type of marketing from followers of any specific God: “Believe what we say and you will be rewarded with paradise, don’t believe in what we say and you’ll be tortured forever!”
A simple “Yes” or “No” answer will be sufficient here, but either way you lose.
If you don’t believe that there’s any real benefit to believing and drawback to not believing in your God, then there’s even less reason to both believe and worship your God since your God can’t do shit if we don’t do those things. Heck, it will make your God even lamer than the mainstream Gods, and that will be one heck of an achievement.
If however you believe that we will get punished if we don’t believe, then you’ve contradicted yourself again and are therefore subject to another loss. See Raj, it was you who said to us that “it was by God’s own design” that we were supposedly made to be “limited in our understandings about God and how he works”. And yet if you think that your God is capable of rewarding/punishing people for believing/not believing in it, then you’ve added yet another definition to a seemingly “undefinable” God, namely that which can make judgments on humanity. Furthermore, it also makes your God if it exists a complete fucking morally corrupt asshole since it punishes people for not believing in it EVEN THOUGH IT WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR SUPPOSEDLY LIMITING PEOPLE’S MINDS SO THAT THEY WOULDN’T SEE EVIDENCE TO BELIEVE IN IT IN THE FIRST PLACE.
Heh. Difficult enough already to keep up with Molly. My OM Nom list, she is long.
jonmilne:
May 31st, 2012 at 3:09 am
Post 11 of this thread reloaded:
Where have I defined God? I have already said why and in which context I use the word God. Can’t repeat what I have already repeated 20 times.
You defined him as something that couldn’t be defined, and where as a result minds trying to define him are limited in how they can do so. But that’s STILL A DEFINITION. If you TRULY couldn’t define God for us, you’d simply say “I don’t know” and admit you’re either ignorant or being simply disingenuous on the subject. Either way, you’ve self-contradicted yourself.
>And, what do you mean by:
“what precisely would be the point of having limitations placed on the human mind in order to understand God“.
Here is what I said:
“God CANNOT be defined or conceptualized. Not Possible. Or, let’s put it this way: Human minds have limitations placed upon them. The mind cannot understand God, and this is by God’s own design. **”
The bolded parts answer your question by what I mean. What purpose does it serve for “God” to make it so that it’s creation can’t understand exactly what it is? When crafting a supposedly “intelligently designed” world, what benefit exactly would it serve to God to have its created people not comprehend it, and what benefit would it serve to the people to be ignorant of the meaning of the supposedly existent God to which you posit?
The mind has limitations placed on it, and because of these limitations, the mind CANNOT understand God. No matter how hard you try. Now when I say the cannot ‘understand’ God, it means the mind cannot comprehend what God is, how God operates, and why God does what God does. Which means, your questions, which are questions originating from your mind, cannot be answered.
My question was: What is the practicality of “limiting our minds” so that we “cannot understand God”? Nonetheless, even if one buys into the notion that your paragraph just there – rather than amounting to more obfuscation – is even remotely considerable as an actual answer to my question, we still have the problem that you’ve just self-contradicted yourself AGAIN.
On the one hand, you claim our minds are so limited that we can’t comprehend God, and yet nonetheless this is a God that you claim to worship. Which means that if that’s truly the case, then despite the fact you have a human mind and therefore have all the “limitations” you talked about, you regardless still seem to UNDERSTAND and COMPREHEND your God of choice enough to WORSHIP it. But by your own logic, that’s simply not possible. There’s close to zero sense in worshipping any of the Gods that have been given certain definitions of characteristics by some of the more main-stream religious cults. There’s ABSOLUTE ZERO sense in worshipping something that you yourself claim that you as a human absolutely do not understand.
Here is one example which I have given many times before. Can you use to mind to visualize something that you haven’t experienced with your sense before? For example, can you visualize the colour ultra-violet in its true form (not false colour)? Or, could you visualize or imagine existence without space and time? Can you imagine ‘what’ was ‘before’ the big bang?
You add an addendum to your point on colour, namely about I how apparently I should not present you with any stuff on the science behind colour perception and the colour spectrum.
What you’re pulling here is similar to something Ray Comfort did in his interview on the Atheist Experience, wherein Ray asked the AE hosts to give him evidence on evolution. I will display the link later on in my post, but what was particularly revealing about the exchange was that the hosts gave Ray some damn good evidence (namely to do with how the development of vaccines are aided, the great deal of transitional fossils, the DNA evidence, the observation of speciation in the lab including flies and bacteria) and Ray rejects all the evidence the hosts present based on his presuppositions despite it being perfectly valid.
That’s what you’re doing here by rejecting the scientific explanations of how colour spectrums and perceptions actually work. They don’t fit with your world-view, so you disregard them, despite having nothing remotely decent resembling evidence to offer as an alternative explanation.
Matt asks why can’t he say that? Ray proclaims that is ignorance and an atheist cannot have that. Matt corrects Ray and says yes you can because atheists are not proclaiming absolute certainty. Ray says Christians DO, and they know there is a creation an a creator. Matt repeats himself by telling Ray that he is just asserting that it is a creation, which is different from demonstrating that this knowledge is true.
What Ray does here is basically saying I can label it as I wish because no one else can explain it to me. Ray is still simply asserting that everything is a creation without providing a shred of proof that it is the result of divine creation, and failure to explain it in a natural process does not mean his position wins by default. Ray claims to “know” that it is a creation, but if he cannot demonstrate it, then he does not know it.
Without evidence, and proper application of the Scientific Process, you cannot just claim that your version of events is the truth. I’m sure I’m not the first person to say this to you, and I almost certainly won’t be the last, but the burden of proof is on YOU.
And please, do some trimming and pruning on your future comments if it is possible.
Sorry buddy, but to paraphrase a great mind, Richard Lenski when he was confronting Conservapedians on their similar level of ignorance and obfuscating and intellectual dishonesty that you’re displaying (especially since you disregarded the entire first half of my last post where I rip Scwartz to shreds):
“I offer this lengthy reply because we are educators as well as scientists. It is my sincere hope that some readers might learn something from this exchange, even if you do not.”
jonmilne:
May 31st, 2012 at 3:11 am
Caine:
What, the Mollies aren’t enough?
Ah, thanks, I wasn’t aware of their existence. Although that said it would still be nice if PZ did an “Individual Post of the Month” as part of the Mollies to add his already existent award recognising posters.
Lyn M, Purveyor of Fine Aphorisms of Death:
May 31st, 2012 at 3:13 am
And please, do some trimming and pruning on your future comments if it is possible.
Because you are making sense and I have run out of dodges.
Although that said it would still be nice if PZ did an “Individual Post of the Month”
I don’t think that’s necessary and it would pretty much be an impossible task. Lots of us provide links to various posts by someone we nominate, which is nice, but given how many outstanding posts can be spotted simply within a single thread, in a matter of hours, every single day…nah.
Also, the OMs are decided by The Horde™, not PZ. Consider it…peer review. ;p
theophontes 777:
May 31st, 2012 at 3:20 am
@ jonmilne
< a href=”" title=”" > is your friend . Right click on the date stamp of the post. “copy link location” to copy. Then place in the href brackets.
You are implying that our perception of green is of primary importance to our understanding of green, and that is false.
You are assuming that all people who aren’t classified as color blind see green the same way, and that is unsubstantiated.
A red/green colour blind cannot see green because his eyes do not have the complete hardware — his eyes cannot pick these wavelengths, and his brain doesn’t receive information about these wavelengths. On the other hand, a person who has a normal colour vision, also has the complete hardware in his eyes, so his eyes send complete information about colours to the brain. This is the difference between a red/green colour blind person, and someone who has a normal colour vision.
Of course, not every colour blind, and not everyone with normal colour vision, would see colours in the exact same way. But, we can draw a line between how colour blinds see colours and how people with normal colour vision see colours, based on the fact that one group has eyes that can see the entire visible colour spectrum, and the other group has eyes that cannot see the entire visible spectrum.
But no need to go into finer details. I gave this example to explain a very simple point, which is: Something we haven’t experienced with our sense before, we cannot imagine it.
A red/green colour blind has not experienced the colour green, so he cannot imagine this colour.
you’ve never ever bothered to consider that it’s your concept that is flawed and simplistic, have you.
I can agree with the ‘simplistic’ part of your comment, because ‘simplistic’ doesn’t mean flawed. But isn’t it ironic that what you call ‘simplistic’, others in your group call it ‘mental masturbation’?
Anyway, you haven’t yet pointed out (rationally) how do you see my concept as flawed?
jonmilne:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:47 am
Hey Raj, I’ve just gotten an email from PZ Myers, thanking me for my wonderful contributions on this site, and since he’s busy right now he’s made me his personal messenger! Isn’t that cool?
Anyways, my first duty as a messenger is to tell you that you’re allowed to post elsewhere on Pharyngula now. Any thread you want buddy, you can post in. I know this because PZ has personally revealed to me with emails that are so totally super-secret that I can’t show anyone else that I’m totally a shoo-in to win the May 2012 Mollie award for Poster of the Month so you can totally trust what I’m saying and I’ve totally got evidence to back it up but hey you just have to believe what I’m saying first!
Anyways, my first duty as a messenger is to tell you that you’re allowed to post elsewhere on Pharyngula now. Any thread you want buddy, you can post in. I know this because PZ has personally revealed to me with emails that are so totally super-secret that I can’t show anyone else that I’m totally a shoo-in to win the May 2012 Mollie award for Poster of the Month so you can totally trust what I’m saying and I’ve totally got evidence to back it up but hey you just have to believe what I’m saying first!
That’s so nice of him and you. But I think it’s time to leave this blog. Just posting my final few messages. Sorry for not replying you, by the way.
Anyway, you haven’t yet pointed out (rationally) how do you see my concept as flawed?
Your concept has been refuted seven ways from Sunday. You are too dumb to see you have no argument. Here’s your problem. You are all OPINION and bullshit. Try getting evidence to back up your arguments. Otherwise, you are admitting to us you are WRONG. And you are WRONG, and won’t ever be right without evidence….
jonmilne:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:09 am
I assure you I am 23. I was born on the 5th of September 1988 in Rutherglen, Scotland. I lived up until the age in 8 in East Kilbride near Glasgow. I moved in 1997 to Wakefield, West Yorkshire in England where I have been living ever since. Furthermore, if Mr Myers were to present all the IPs of all the posters here, it would confirm that I am posting with a different geographical location. I could also if I so wished show you my birth certificate and other legal documents that would prove who I am.
Also, Mr Myers just sent me another email to pass onto you. It says “Oh go on Raj, just post in any of the other threads to your heart’s content, nothing will happen, promise! Would Jon really lie to you when he’s been so civil and patient with you? Sincerely PZ Myers”
JonMilne, I still don’t believe you. But don’t worry too much about convincing me though. You are not going to win a medal from me for being the honest lad that you are trying to act you are. YOu just don’t sound like a 23 year old — not even close. More like 60+ give or take.
Anyway, thanks so much again for sharing the info, but still not interested. I have written to my heart’s content already — all there was to be said here.
I wish you good luck in your ‘future endeavours.’
Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:29 am
I have written to my heart’s content already — all there was to be said here.
Then your heart has zero intellectual content. NOTHING BUT BULLSHIT.
jonmilne:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:36 am
If I had a webcam and a mic, I would also be able to engage in a Skype conversation with you, which would also prove that I’m certainly not 60 but I am in fact 23.
Face it dude, I’m younger than you. I recognise that it’s a bitter pill to swallow that you just got your ass handed to you by someone half or at least two-thirds your age, but that’s the harsh reality buddy.
Plus, in a website that is purely “text” orientated, how exactly can I “sound” like any age? Surely it’s “looking” like any age. If you’re judging by the way I write, then it’s simply the positive side-effect of having a damn good education and having English Literature and English Language being my favourite subjects in high school and getting good grades in them as a result. Just because I corrected you on a woeful spelling of a philosophical term does not make me “old”. Au contraire, it makes me educated.
Besides, what are we to make of your grammar and incoherancy on this site? I can buy that you were around when LPs were first released, but the way you type makes me believe that you were probably home-schooled, which would explain a lot about why you are borderline illiterate and are seriously lacking in the applications of scientific, secular, and rational logics.
Then your heart has zero intellectual content. NOTHING BUT BULLSHIT.
True. Intellect and logic are mind stuff, and they belongs to the mind, not the heart. Heart is the sign of love, warm feelings and emotions. Ever wonder why humans use heart as a sign of love?
Besides, what are we to make of your grammar and incoherancy on this site? I can buy that you were around when LPs were first released, but the way you type makes me believe that you were probably home-schooled, which would explain a lot about why you are borderline illiterate and are seriously lacking in the applications of scientific, secular, and rational logics.
The difference between you and me is, dude, I am not trying to convince you. You are free to believe anything you want to believe about me. You, on the other hand, are trying so hard to convince me, as if your life depended on it. If I am wrong about you, then it is ME who is wrong, not you. So, don’t feel threatened about it. Just smile and brush it aside.
It may be my last post. All depends on how Nerd responds to my last post to him.
Ever wonder why humans use heart as a sign of love?
Because hearts are juicy and sweet and totally delicious? Especially when freshly ripped from a kitten’s ribcage.
mikmik:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:51 am
Then your heart has zero intellectual content. NOTHING BUT BULLSHIT.
I’d like to add, if I may be so bold, Nerd, that it’s a particularly inferior class of bullshit at that. Raj, You are not going to win a medal for being the dishonest lad that you are trying to act you are.
The search for the next danielhaven continues.
FossilFishy (Lobed-finned Killer of Threads):
May 31st, 2012 at 6:56 am
Ever wonder why humans use heart as a sign of love?
Oh Rajy, please don’t leave us! No one else makes me bark with laughter like you do. My wife gave me a pleased look after I reacted to the above line. She thinks that I work too much and that it’s making me humourless. For the sake of my marriage I emplore you to find it in your, er, heart to continue to fight the good fight here.
jonmilne:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:56 am
True. Intellect and logic are mind stuff, and they belongs to the mind, not the heart. Heart is the sign of love, warm feelings and emotions. Ever wonder why humans use heart as a sign of love?
Nope, your heart makes no decisions whatsoever about who you choose to love, have affection for and feel the drive to protect them. It’s all in the mind too, you dumb fuck.
As for why the heart is used as a sign of love, it’s purely because a bunch of literary artists like Shakespeare started using the heart as a symbol of conveying that kind of feeling, then a whole bunch of other literary artists followed suit. And then we saw the invention of Valentine’s Day as a means to commercialise the whole love thing and cartoon hearts became a convenient symbol for Valentines Cards and presents to be plastered all over.
Stop doing Karl Pilkington impressions. He at least manages to be funny and still has some degree of common sense and intellect and credibility. Whereas you’re nothing more than a Mind Blowingly Stupid Fapwit (TM) who has betrayed the civility and patience that I’ve showed you throughout the thread by refusing to answer my questions and just invoking ultra-lame excuses as to why you can’t, thereby blowing your entire credibility out of the water.
Louis:
May 31st, 2012 at 7:00 am
Is Raj still going? He is truly the gift that keeps on giving.
And I am using “gift” in the German sense.
Louis
mikmik:
May 31st, 2012 at 7:01 am
Oh, I’d like to nominate jonmilne for a medal from raj.
Actually, raj, PZ always did like him best. jon always gets the biggest tankard of grog when we go digging for corpses, so maybe if you gave jonmilne that medal, it could go a long way towards proving your sincerity. Especially if it’s a big one made out of platinum and he gave little bits of it to me.
jonmilne:
May 31st, 2012 at 7:03 am
The difference between you and me is, dude, I am not trying to convince you.
So what, pray tell, are you still doing in this thread? Seriously, you’ve been in the TZT threads since what, the 3rd one? And our exchanges started at sometime around TZT 7 right? And during that time you continually repeatedly posted posts where you insist that THIS TIME you’re leaving, only for you to return more or less within 24-48 hours of having done so. If you’re going to leave, or actually respond to stuff, then fucking well EITHER DO ONE OR THE OTHER. Either respond to all the posts including mine that have debunked your crap in full like someone with some intellectual honesty, or forget about your stupid “Well let’s see how Nerd responds first” bullshit and just STOP FUCKING POSTING YOU LAMEASS KARL PILKINGTON WANNABE! Failure to do either of those things just confirms your current status as a Mind Blowingly Stupid Fapwit (TM).
mikmik:
May 31st, 2012 at 7:08 am
Everything in this section always has to do with zombies and becoming undead, y’all ever notice that?
In Egyptian mythology, the heart portion of the soul was weighed in a balance against the feather of Ma’at, symbolising truth, in the judgment of the dead in the Egyptian Book of the Dead. Egyptian sources do not actually reveal whether the heart had to be lighter than the feather for the deceased to pass into paradise—all depictions show only the weighing of the heart, not the actual results, heavier or lighter.
So what, pray tell, are you still doing in this thread? Seriously, you’ve been in the TZT threads since what, the 3rd one? And our exchanges started at sometime around TZT 7 right? And during that time you continually repeatedly posted posts where you insist that THIS TIME you’re leaving, only for you to return more or less within 24-48 hours of having done so. If you’re going to leave, or actually respond to stuff, then fucking well EITHER DO ONE OR THE OTHER. Either respond to all the posts including mine that have debunked your crap in full like someone with some intellectual honesty, or forget about your stupid “Well let’s see how Nerd responds first” bullshit and just STOP FUCKING POSTING YOU LAMEASS KARL PILKINGTON WANNABE! Failure to do either of those things just confirms your current status as a Mind Blowingly Stupid Fapwit (TM).
Just before I go, still don’t believe you. Still don’t buy your crap. You are one grumpy old man.
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 31st, 2012 at 7:28 am
So what, pray tell, are you still doing in this thread?
“Oh Rajy, please don’t leave us! No one else makes me bark with laughter like you do.”
It gets changed into:
“”Oh Rajy, please don’t leave us! No one else makes me bark like you do.”
I know. I have got a thing with dogs…
Louis:
May 31st, 2012 at 7:33 am
Jon Milne,
You do realise that by trolling you, Raj has just got you to reveal what appears to be relatively useful personal information, right?
It might all be bullshit, but, dude, if it isn’t…
…not smart.
Louis
Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:
May 31st, 2012 at 7:35 am
Heart is the sign of love, warm feelings and emotions.
The only thing you love is yourself misogynist fuckwit. Your heart is full of shit.
Just before I go, still don’t believe you. Still don’t buy your crap. You are one grumpy old man.
You are saying you lost the rational argument, and must respond emotionally using your heart full of shit to being shown as the fuckwitted idjit you are.
The only thing you love is yourself misogynist fuckwit. Your heart is full of shit.
At least, I don’t pretend to be a ‘gentleman’ who loves his wife so much that no other woman in the world holds any attraction for him … only to secretly masturbate twenty times a day, give or take, to cheap internet porn. Not to mention secret interactions with cheap hookers. You are truly the greatest defender of the feminist movement known to man.
Jesus fucking christ, we need some type of banhammer here.
Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:
May 31st, 2012 at 7:57 am
The only thing you love is yourself misogynist fuckwit. Your heart is full of shit.
At least, I don’t pretend to be a ‘gentleman’ who loves his wife so much that no other woman in the world holds any attraction for him … only to secretly masturbate twenty times a day, give or take, to cheap internet porn. Not to mention secret interactions with cheap hookers. You are truly the greatest defender of the feminist movement known to man.
Thanks for proving my point, oh useless, incompetent and incomprehensible one. You love yourself, and hate others who love and respect other people.
Oh, and no emotions are found in the heart except through faulty language, which idjits like you use. They all come from the brain. Any semi-educated person knows that. Which leaves you where??
FossilFishy (Lobed-finned Killer of Threads):
May 31st, 2012 at 8:19 am
Oh frabjoulous day! The one and only knower of all things, the definer of the undefinable, explainer of the unexpainable, and most exalted lover of canines noticed me! Little old me, with my self esteem issues and my pesky devotion to evidential standards. I’m trying to fix that, I am!
And with Raj to show the way, to lay before me his infinite understanding of all creation in that deep, moist, fecund way of his I’m sure that my salivation, er, I mean SALVATION is at hand. No longer will I have to settle for the crumbs that I must scrabble willy-nilly from beneath the lofty golden throne of the wisdom to which he so graciously, so noblely, has bestowed upon the undeserving hoard. No, now I shall receive the revelation, the veritable keys to the very quantum-foaminess really real reality, direct from the master’s own fingertips.
So please oh wise one, oh see-er of the unseeable, oh most perfect jokester-seeker-revealer, please show me the way…(dare I ask it…yes, yes, I must, I MUST, he’s leaving, seize the carp before it’s too late)…please I beg you, humble, upon blended knee and with plaintiff, perfect piety: how can I be more like you!?
Hurinomyces bruxellensis:
May 31st, 2012 at 9:14 am
But no need to go into finer details. I gave this example to explain a very simple point, which is: Something we haven’t experienced with our sense before, we cannot imagine it.
So then I can’t imagine black holes, or radio waves, or neutrinos or the earth’s core, or a perfect circle, right? That’s interesting, because I’m pretty sure I actually can imagine all of those things, but according to you I shouldn’t be able to.
Your argument is something like if I were to assert that planes can’t fly, because they don’t have any strings attached to them, and then try to defend it by saying that you can’t lift a rock without picking it up or tying a string to it. Then when everyone objects to that stupid analogy by talking about magnets and gunpowder and all the other things that might move a rock against gravity, I would say “No, No, No, no science please, this is very simple; you can’t lift a rock without tying a string to it.”
One more time. Your assertion is false. Your analogy is stupid because it ignores everything about reality that you don’t like.
Could you describe to me the color darfigan? Pretty please?
jonmilne:
May 31st, 2012 at 10:43 am
On a non-Raj related note, how are people feeling now that Obama’s professed opinion about gay marriage seems to have swung public opinion in America towards legalisation of the practice?
On the one hand, I would certainly like to think that Obama knew that would happen if he spoke out, but I certainly still do think he could engaged in a tad more activism on the subject than he actually did.
Also, has anyone ever heard of the SCP Foundation? It’s a really cool website that’s set up like a super-secret agency that confiscates paranormal creatures and items. Check it out here: http://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/main and also check out the top rated pages here: http://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/top-rated-pages . I’m largely partial to the Keter-level articles, with SCPs 1000, 1983, 1322 and 231 being my favourites. That said, I also love 173, 294 and 2558-J too.
Amphiox:
May 31st, 2012 at 10:58 am
Another series of fappings from the fapwit.
Still no IP address to support its accusations of sockpuppetry.
Still no apologies for slandering.
Another series of admissions of LYING.
Amphiox:
May 31st, 2012 at 10:59 am
The difference between you and me is, dude, I am not trying to convince you.
Another blatant lie by the fapwit. Someone “not trying to convince” would not still be here, fapping away.
Also, has anyone ever heard of the SCP Foundation?
Thanks. Thanks very much for what is going to be a serious time sink. Time I already procrastinate at work, as if I had a procrastination rock in a box in my office.
Thanks. Really.
Amphiox:
May 31st, 2012 at 11:11 am
A red/green colour blind cannot see green
Says the fapwit EVEN AFTER A PERSON WHO IS ACTUALLY red-green colour blind outright told him that was not true.
Pathetic lying fapwit.
because his eyes do not have the complete hardware — his eyes cannot pick these wavelengths, and his brain doesn’t receive information about these wavelengths
WRONG. As can easily be seen in the link I previously provided, a red-green colour blind person can EASILY pick up green wavelengths of light. ALL THREE of the opsins that red-green colour blind people still have will detect green light. TWO of them even PEAK their sensitivity in green light.
In fact, based on those sensitivity curves, in all likelihood red-green colour blind people will perceive green shades as something very similar to what regular people do. It is RED that is the colour that will look very different from what regular people will see has red, and will instead look like shades of green and grey.
Amphiox:
May 31st, 2012 at 11:15 am
Not to mention secret interactions with cheap hookers.
A serious accusation, fapwit, seeing as solicitation of prostitutes is a crime in most jurisdictions.
Provide EVIDENCE, admissible in a COURT OF LAW (as you have made a legal accusation), RIGHT NOW, or APOLOGIZE to NofR IMMEDIATELY.
Or admit, IMMEDIATELY, that you are an unethical slimewad who bears false witness against his neighbour for kicks.
Hurinomyces bruxellensis:
May 31st, 2012 at 11:37 am
only to secretly masturbate twenty times a day, give or take, to cheap internet porn. Not to mention secret interactions with cheap hookers. You are truly the greatest defender of the feminist movement known to man.
Amphiox is exactly right about this statement.
You should apologize to Nerd. Unless you have something to back this accusation up with (which I’m sure you don’t) it is libel.
Be careful what you say about people. If you tell malicious lies about them they may have legal means to make you regret it.
Ever wonder why humans use heart as a sign of love?
It used to be believed that the liver was the seat of human emotion and the heart the seat of reason. This is the sort of crap humans come up with before they figure things out. Then, people figure things out and get a little bit right! Well, most people. You wouldn’t be one of them.
Oh, and this -> ♥ is not patterned after a human heart. It’s patterned after the shape of a woman’s ass when bent over. If you think about it for a couple of years, I’m sure you’ll get it.
I may be mistaken here, but I seem to recall raj, in an earlier incarnation of this thread, admitting that the subjective experience of his hypothesized greater universal intelligence would be indistinguishable from a simple biologically driven hallucination.
He has also said that there would be no way to distinguish any deliberate actions of this supposed intelligence from the normal operations of the universe.
Oh right yes, the great parsimony shout-off. I remember now.
Then there was the whole bit about why do we call ourselves atheists when most of us accept a non-zero probability of a creator intelligence, and that we should instead call ourselves agnostics, which strikes me as some kind of poorly planned wedge strategy.
And now we have raj admitting that he doesn’t even read posts of any notable length, so that unless an argument can be made in the form of a Fox news sound bite, it is functionally invisible to him.
So to summarize (and to make my post longer and hence, only visible to the Illuminated Elite)- Raj would like us all to say we believe in a creator intelligence that will never have any meaningful impact on our lives or the course of history.
@Gnumann – It’s how you know you’re part of the Atheiluminati. Or you were pining for them, one of the two.
A. R:
May 31st, 2012 at 2:18 pm
After weeks of research* I have discovered the source of the Misognraj’s seemingly infinite supplies of stupid. He’s using a subspace trasceiver network to extract the combined stupid of every fundie, wooist, and bigot on the planet and funnel it here. Obviously he’s metering the flow, but imagine what would happen if he didn’t… [shudder]
*(not really, I just came up with this shit)
Cal:
May 31st, 2012 at 2:42 pm
As a long time lurker, I think I may have puzzled out some of Raj’s comments about grumpy old men and multiple ego’s. He may actually think many of those commenting are PZ himself, and he at least thinks Jon is based on his comments # 268, 272, and 285.
Other than that, I get the impression that he once heard something from an authority figure about how explaining god was like explaining green to a colorblind person and either he was high or contemplating boobs at the time but was struck by the simple argument and is unsure how to proceed since he never thought about it and most people have or can think about it when presented with the questiony. In fact, a quick search in the Google machine links to pages of answers to how this could be done, with one link pointing here to TZT. As someone who grew up very religious and actually served a (Mormon) mission, I recall how hard it was to deal with people who would not stick to the script. That is the impression I get from Raj, that you have deviated so far from his script that you have completely lost him. His simple question has a simple answer and you will not play along.
chigau (違う):
May 31st, 2012 at 2:52 pm
A. R
That could explain the lack of originality.
A. R:
May 31st, 2012 at 2:59 pm
chigau: Exactly! For all we know, the misogyny outbursts are caused when the MRAs contributing to his stupid collective come through a bit strongly… I HAVE IT! Raj and the stupid people are like the Borg! The subspace network is actually a giant hive mind of stupidity.
Excellent analysis. You should lurk less, and participate more. At least, in my opinion.
chigau (違う):
May 31st, 2012 at 3:10 pm
“My name is Legion, for we are many.”
Cal:
May 31st, 2012 at 3:19 pm
Point from Raj: But no need to go into finer details. I gave this example to explain a very simple point, which is: Something we haven’t experienced with our sense before, we cannot imagine it
I meant to call BS on this statement as well. Because clearly every fantasy and SciFi novel I have ever read would have been impossible since these events or even events like them could not have been perceived with our senses. We imagine stuff all the time that does not exist in reality and we have history showing us that this has been happening for as long as we have data and art.
Cal @312 – I think you have a big piece of the puzzle there. If I had two internetz, I’d give you one.
Brownian:
May 31st, 2012 at 3:53 pm
As a long time lurker, I think I may have puzzled out some of Raj’s comments about grumpy old men and multiple ego’s. He may actually think many of those commenting are PZ himself, and he at least thinks Jon is based on his comments # 268, 272, and 285.
Huh. So that’s why he thought I could ban him.
Christ, what a moron.
Ogvorbis:
May 31st, 2012 at 3:59 pm
He may actually think many of those commenting are PZ himself, and he at least thinks Jon is based on his comments # 268, 272, and 285.
This hypotheosis has been advanced before. Usually accompanied by accusations of hiveminditis.
Glad you could unlurk, Ca.
Cal:
May 31st, 2012 at 4:08 pm
Thanks! I hope to participate more and lurk less :)
Ogvorbis:
May 31st, 2012 at 4:11 pm
Crap. Sorry I murdered your ‘nym, Cal.
Maybe you could change it to something easier to spell? :)
cm's changeable moniker:
May 31st, 2012 at 4:22 pm
Cal @#317, quoting Raj:
Something we haven’t experienced with our sense before, we cannot imagine it
Me too. I mean, I’ve never experienced beta decay, but I can imagine it. And I once had a job measuring it with a scintillometer, so I’m pretty sure it’s real.
Raj, if you’re reading? Beta decay. About your level (and not Wikipedia).
cm's changeable moniker:
May 31st, 2012 at 4:31 pm
Guy @#226:
A red/green colourblind person is perfectly capable of seeing green and distinguishing it from other colours, just like she/he is able to see red. Even if you put a red object next to a green object they would be able to tell which is green and which is red.
The problem for a red/green colourblind person comes when you take different shades of green and red and mix them together, then they are unable to see which is which.
I know this because I am red/green colourblind.
Ah, gotcha. So you can perceive Jahweh and Allah, but when the pantheons of Norse and Greek gods start moshing they all look the same? ;-)
kemist, Dark Lord of the Sith:
May 31st, 2012 at 4:37 pm
But no need to go into finer details. I gave this example to explain a very simple point, which is: Something we haven’t experienced with our sense before, we cannot imagine it.
Well, duh.
And therefore your god, huh ?
We’ve been telling you, with plenty of exemples, that this assertion pulled from your nether regions is completely false.
And anyway, even if there was any truth to it, it wouldn’t advance your god idea one bit since all those exemples you gave are fundamentally different from it : they concern things which we know, from solid evidence, exist outside of people’s heads.
When it’s evident to everybody with two functional brain cells where you’re driving to, why insist on taking everybody to the tourist trap on Mount Irrelevant ?
We’ve been telling you, with plenty of exemples, that this assertion pulled from your nether regions is completely false.
Kemist, you are all extremely lousy debaters, and far more lousy ‘scientists’.
Plus, there are a few more things that I have noted about most of you:
1)You sulk when you have nothing more to argue.
2)Some of you split yourselves into many alter egos in order to troll
3)Many of you attempt to glorify your puny selves with incredibly stupid boasts, nonsensical ravings, and other extremely stupid ego-inflating devices.
4)Most of you live under the delusion and illusion of being a real scientist, and this includes you, too.
Maybe I am wrong. But once you mind is made up about someone…? As you have made up your mind about me… Nothing can be done about it I guess. But in the end, who bloody cares about someone’s opinions?
Now, it is your turn to speak to your heart’s content. I am done here, in every sense of the expression.
Take Care
Have fun!
Ichthyic:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:12 pm
Kemist, you are all extremely lousy debaters, and far more lousy ‘scientists’.
thousands of posts, and you still haven’t figured out that what you think matters about as much as what my fish think.
amazing.
here, let me spell it out for you, again:
you’re stupid.
if you need further explanation, read # 312.
kemist, Dark Lord of the Sith:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:14 pm
Now, it is your turn to speak to your heart’s content. I am done here, in every sense of the expression.
Is anyone keeping a score of the flounces anymore ?
Louis:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:16 pm
I’m a lousy scientist?
Was that meant to offend me? Sweetie, you don’t even know what kind of scientist I am, let alone what kind of scientist I am. And even if you did, you’d have to get someone to help you with the long words.
{Claps hands}
New moron please!
Louis
Ichthyic:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:16 pm
Is anyone keeping a score of the flounces anymore ?
I threw my scorecard out days ago.
..and it was an 11×14 sized paper.
I think Raj has singlehandedly redefined “flounce”, or we have to come up with a different descriptor.
Ichthyic:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:18 pm
anyone bring the flamethrower? It’s time for fire instead of headshots.
as I stated ages ago, this thing isn’t a zombie.
some sort of ghoul or something?
A. R:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:21 pm
kemist: I lost track somewhere around 100.
kemist, Dark Lord of the Sith:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:26 pm
I think Raj has singlehandedly redefined “flounce”, or we have to come up with a different descriptor.
Since Raj has not experienced an actual flounce with his senses, he cannot imagine how to stick it…
:snortle: +8
Lyn M, Purveyor of Fine Aphorisms of Death:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:40 pm
1)You sulk when you have nothing more to argue.
2)Some of you split yourselves into many alter egos in order to troll
3)Many of you attempt to glorify your puny selves with incredibly stupid boasts, nonsensical ravings, and other extremely stupid ego-inflating devices.
4)Most of you live under the delusion and illusion of being a real scientist, and this includes you, too.
Do you suppose raj ever heard of the psychological concept of transference?
Hurinomyces bruxellensis:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:43 pm
Raj
I am done here, in every sense of the expression.
Therefore God.
A. R:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:45 pm
as I stated ages ago, this thing isn’t a zombie.
some sort of ghoul or something?
Nope, it’s a Borg drone. And flamethrowers and headshots will do you no good, they adapt too quickly. You need a phaser rifle with a fre
A. R:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:46 pm
as I stated ages ago, this thing isn’t a zombie.
some sort of ghoul or something?
Nope, it’s a Borg drone. And flamethrowers and headshots will do you no good, they adapt too quickly. You need a phaser rifle with a frequency modulator chip (I think that’s what they called it).
Lyn M, Purveyor of Fine Aphorisms of Death:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:46 pm
Perhaps raj has given us a clue as to what he does:
1)You sulk when you have nothing more to argue.
sulk out? Some combination of sulk and flounce? sounce?
Louis:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:47 pm
Lyn M,
Do you suppose raj ever heard of the psychological concept of transference?
If he has, he’ll call it a bad scientist, accuse it of sock puppetry, ask how it communicated before wikipedia and the stare at its tits until he sees god.
Louis
P.S. I think the only philosophical question Raj has genuinely answered beyond reasonable doubt is “what is the sound of one mind fapping?”.
A. R:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:49 pm
Louis : You forgot that he’ll probably try to get it to explain green.
Lyn M, Purveyor of Fine Aphorisms of Death:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:49 pm
@ AR
Yep. Sort of a Hedy Lamarr phaser, which raj would immediately say proves god.
Louis:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:49 pm
Good point good point.
Louis
Lyn M, Purveyor of Fine Aphorisms of Death:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:51 pm
@ Louis
Good point. And then he’ll change the subject and announce everyone is a grumpy old man.
cm's changeable moniker:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:51 pm
Some combination of sulk and flounce? sounce?
Flulk.
chigau (違う):
May 31st, 2012 at 5:54 pm
Which ones of you are the sockpuppets?
Tony:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:55 pm
Ichthyic:
I think Raj has invented the …
Tigger Flounce.
thanks ever so much for that! Between my roommate and I, we just listened to that sing a long as well as two from The Little Mermaid (I can’t believe I still remember many of the lyrics to “Under the Sea” and “Part of that world”).
Louis:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:59 pm
Chigau,
I have enough trouble just being me. I haven’t the time or energy to be someone else! ;-)
Louis
Lyn M, Purveyor of Fine Aphorisms of Death:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:59 pm
Well, this was a slice, but have to go to work.
On the flounce, how about a gigaflounce? It will scale up, too.
Ichthyic:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:01 pm
Which ones of you are the sockpuppets?
I AM SPARTACUS!
Ichthyic:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:03 pm
You need a phaser rifle with a frequency modulator chip (I think that’s what they called it).
We may now all retire to tend our gardens and die in the rose bushes.
but… all I have going right now is an herb garden…
with nightshade and hemlock as weeds*.
*no kidding, my inlaws were rather in a tizzy about it when they stopped by last wknd.
antigodless:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:13 pm
@ chigau (違う)
You have very few words, but bring some focus and encouragement in them. You take a great interest in a range of topics. I am interested from which cultural heritage are you from? I can’t tell between Japanese, Korean, or Chinese. I am Interested in worldviews (I am married to an Indonesian), but would love to hear a little of your story one day? Maybe share your story?
cm's changeable moniker:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:17 pm
Oh, for goodness sake, if you’re going to kill the queen, at least do it properly:
Chigau, antigodless is attempting to lead you down the thorny stones to yak your ear off about gods. Don’t go! We’ll be bored silly.
A. R:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:25 pm
Ichthyic: I’m not sure, but I think a few photon torpedoes would do the job. (Also, your herb garden concerns me.)
Louis: Hmm, but which roses? And in which bed?
Cal:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:27 pm
I know I am a late to the game, but can anyone point me to the end of the queue for Brownian?
A. R:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:30 pm
Cal: It’s near the door to TET. If you want, you can always join Teh Transdimensional Groop Secks With Louis singularity. Entrance is in the broom closet above the stairs to the dungeon.
Ichthyic:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:33 pm
Don’t go! We’ll be bored silly.
no, GO!
we need the distraction until fearless leader returns to close the gate on it.
Ichthyic:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:34 pm
You have very few words, but bring some focus and encouragement in them.
Oh good, antigoodness is here. I do love me some witnessing. By which I mean witnessing their idiotic attempts at debate.
Amphiox:
May 31st, 2012 at 7:06 pm
Still slandering us with the sickpuppetry accusation, are you, fapwit?
Every computer connects to the Internet with a unique IP Address, fapwit. If anyone creates alter egos, this is instantly obvious, with multiple pseudonyms all using the same IP address. The IP addresses are ALL visible to PZ, and he INSTANTLY banhammers sockpuppets.
So back up your accusations with IP Addresses linked to pseudonyms IMMEDIATELY, or apologize for slandering us.
Amphiox:
May 31st, 2012 at 7:18 pm
Our opinion of you, fapwit, is continuously formed from the posts you make. Mine has changed CONSTANTLY. It continues to get lower and lower, which each new fap from you.
I will change it back in the other direction when you CHANGE YOUR BEHAVIOR, APOLOGIZE for your slanders and other jerkasseries, and RETRACT every single one of your many, many shameless lies.
cm's changeable moniker:
May 31st, 2012 at 8:09 pm
Amphiox:
Every computer connects to the Internet with a unique IP Address
*ahem*
Every device connected to a network has a (probabilistically) unique MAC address, it’s true, but, given NAT, not a unique IP address.
–
(BTW, I think you’ve probably flogged the “rajkumar says I’m a sockpuppet, therefore slander” dead horse enough already.
The parsimonious explanation is that he doesn’t understand “sockpuppet”. The slightly-less-parsimonious explanation is that he thinks you’re all PZ.
And it would be libel anyway, not slander.)
Menyambal --- Sambal's sockpuppet:
May 31st, 2012 at 8:36 pm
Doesn’t understand “sockpuppet”?
He may not use the term, but he’s long been harping on the idea that most of us are pretending to be something we aren’t–ersatz scientists, at least.
Recently, he’s really hit the concept that some folks are logged in with false identities–what most of us call “sockpuppeting”.
Of course, if he did call it “sockpuppeting”, he’d probably define it as some other damn thing.
kemist, Dark Lord of the Sith:
May 31st, 2012 at 9:06 pm
Which ones of you are the sock puppets?
I don’t mind, if I can get googly eyes to see my illusory PhD.
Amphiox:
May 31st, 2012 at 9:17 pm
Recently, he’s really hit the concept that some folks are logged in with false identities–what most of us call “sockpuppeting”.
He’s been using the term “alter egos”, in the plural.
The parsimonious explanation is that he doesn’t understand “sockpuppet”.
From the raj:
Some of you split yourselves into many alter egos in order to troll
He understands it better than he understands red-green colourblindness, at any rate.
chigau (違う):
May 31st, 2012 at 9:18 pm
Caine
Way back @39 Louis said that it’s my turn to play nice with a troll.
I don’t think I have a choice.
Louis wouldn’t lie to me.
Would he?
Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:
May 31st, 2012 at 9:18 pm
Oh good, antigoodness is here. I do love me some witnessing. By which I mean witnessing their idiotic attempts at debate.
True debate would mean the AGL (AIDL) could be wrong. I’ve never met a godbot/creobot who could be wrong. So AIDL preaches, but cannot debate….Whereas real and conclusive physical evidence stands a chance of changing many atheists minds. But the level of evidence required, equivalent to the eternally burning bush, appears well beyond what the delusional godbots can offer. Which is a picture of imaginary jebus in shower mold…
Plus, there are a few more things that I have noted about most of you:
Again, you present a lot of assertions, with no evidence to back them up.
Do you seriously think the whole, “You can’t imagine something you’ve not personally experienced” line of reasoning had any real merit? I mean, especially after we pretty much trounced it with, y’know, evidence. And examples. Many, many examples.
Now it’d be nice if you’d present examples backing up all your assertions about our collective character. Because really, all it looks like from this end of the conversation is a case of hurt feelings.
chigau (違う):
May 31st, 2012 at 9:28 pm
Besides
I can’t tell between Japanese, Korean, or Chinese.
is irresistible and
.
(I am married to an Indonesian)
is intriguing (identified spouse’s ethnicity but not own ethnicity.)
Lyn M, Purveyor of Fine Aphorisms of Death:
May 31st, 2012 at 9:29 pm
@ amphiox
He understands it better than he understands red-green colourblindness, at any rate.
I’m kinda curious where you were going with the whole, “If you can’t experience it, you can’t imagine it” line of reasoning. Were you going to suggest that, since we can imagine God, we must have truly experienced God, and God must exist?
(Yeah, I’m assuming raj can’t stick to the flounce.)
Amphiox:
May 31st, 2012 at 9:48 pm
Like that’s hard.
Small steps.
Very small steps.
Lyn M, Purveyor of Fine Aphorisms of Death:
May 31st, 2012 at 9:52 pm
@ Amphiox 386
Small steps.
Very small steps.
But … but I thought you can’t get smaller divisions than Planck’s constant permits.
Snoof:
May 31st, 2012 at 10:07 pm
@ nigelTheBold
I’m kinda curious where you were going with the whole, “If you can’t experience it, you can’t imagine it” line of reasoning. Were you going to suggest that, since we can imagine God, we must have truly experienced God, and God must exist?
No, it’s even stupider than that.
It’s “you haven’t experienced God, therefore you can’t imagine it, therefore you can’t define it, therefore you can’t argue against it as a proposition”.
That is, assuming rajkumar sticks to previous arguments.
It’s “you haven’t experienced God, therefore you can’t imagine it, therefore you can’t define it, therefore you can’t argue against it as a proposition”.
That is, assuming rajkumar sticks to previous arguments.
Oh, fuck me running. Is that really what this was about? I mean, I have to admit, I’ve been skimming this thread, as I’ve been too busy for words these last few weeks. I’ve read as much of raj’s stuff as I could stomach, and saw some stuff defending his definition of God (even denying he defined or described God, when in fact he had, just not formally).
But really. If that’s the line of thought raj was pursuing, my opinion of xes intellect just plummeted. And it’s not like it was perched atop a tall cliff to begin with. Your summation of the argument dug a hole, climbed back out, and pushed my opinion in.
Menyambal --- Sambal's sockpuppet:
May 31st, 2012 at 11:07 pm
Raj says, “You can’t imagine something you’ve not personally experienced.”
I say he’s imagining something he’s not personally experienced, namely everything he thinks we are doing, feeling and pretending to be.
Ichthyic:
May 31st, 2012 at 11:59 pm
I don’t think I have a choice.
Louis wouldn’t lie to me.
Would he?
is that a haiku?
Ichthyic:
June 1st, 2012 at 12:01 am
Of course, if he did call it “sockpuppeting”, he’d probably define it as some other damn thing.
probably involving a literal sock.
theophontes 坏蛋:
June 1st, 2012 at 1:27 am
I must confess that I cannot sockpuppet for physiological reasons. A picture of my attempt. WYSIWYG.
@ chigau (違う)
*cough*
Did I ever tell you about my experiences witnessing in China?
John Morales:
June 1st, 2012 at 4:36 am
[meta]
Cal, you landed a 10 in your delurkance.
(Fairly awesome)
–
The value of TZT now includes dividends!
'Tis Himself:
June 1st, 2012 at 5:18 am
Yeah, I’m assuming raj can’t stick to the flounce.
That’s a reasonable assumption based on past performance.
Ogvorbis:
June 1st, 2012 at 8:42 am
I think Raj has singlehandedly redefined “flounce”, or we have to come up with a different descriptor.
Pogoing?
Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:
June 1st, 2012 at 8:46 am
Raj says, “You can’t imagine something you’ve not personally experienced.”
He must not read science-fiction/fantasy. A whole genre of literature refutes his sorry thinking.
PZ, I suggest a picture of a zombie sockpuppet for the next incarnation of this thread (assuming such a picture exists, and further assuming this thread is granted a new incarnation).
Ogvorbis:
June 1st, 2012 at 8:49 am
The value of TZT now includes dividends!
Which exchange is it listed on and what is the abreviation?
I have to concede my newly won internet to you Ogvorbis because that was awesome… :)
Amphiox:
June 1st, 2012 at 1:45 pm
Lyn @387;
Planck’s constant only applies to this, physical reality. The raj inhabits a different kind of universe, where all things are possible (but unimaginable).
And indeed, the sub-planck capacity for intellectual growth MUST be the case, for it is the dynamic opposite that balances the fulcrum of the raj’s existence, the yin to the yang of the boundless infinity of its incompetence and dishonesty.
Amphiox:
June 1st, 2012 at 1:48 pm
Are TZT dividends taxed at corporate or individual rates?
Phalacrocorax, aus der Dritte Welt:
June 1st, 2012 at 1:54 pm
This started as a reconstitution of antigodless’s flowchart of the creation, but it too rapidly became excessively bloated, silly and unflowchartlike for a “Why I am an atheist” thread. So I’m just going to toss it here instead and let the grues eat it.
Sorry for the inconvenience.
—-
THE LEGEND OF GOD’S MYSTERY MAGIC ADVENTURE QUEST (120% BIBLICALLY ACCURATE!)
Pilot Episode: Bere’s shit
(John 1:1-2) It is very dark in here, for some strange meanings of “here.” God hardly can see anything. Yet he finds within himself a sniny something called The Word.
(John 1:3) God examines The Word and figures out that it can be used to create things.
(Gen 1:1) God uses The Word to create the Heavens and the Earth. It is still not clear what those concepts mean.
(Gen 1:2) God tries to inspect his creation, but it is still dark all around. His toes touch something moist and cold underneath him. Oops… Perhaps he created Water instead of the Earth after all.
(Gen 1:3) God discovers he is capable of speaking. That’s funny, as there was nobody around he could talk to. Or was there? He couldn’t really recall… Anyway, God orders The Word to create Photons. His command is promptly obeyed.
(Gen 1:4-5) God is pleased, but he sees that it is too bright now. To solve the problem, he orders light and darkness to alternate. It was not the best solution for the problem, but it would work for the moment.
(Gen 1:6-7) With the new light, God inspects his environment. As he suspected, it was full of water where there should be the Earth. God wonders how its molecules could hold together before there were photons to intermediate the electromagnetic force, but decides to shrug this mystery off till later. There were more pressing problems now. For example, the Heavens looked awfully empty. Seeing nothing around to fill them with, God decides to put some of the water up there. With all the power of his omnipotence, God kicks a good bunch of water into the skies, roaring while he does it.
(Gen 1:8) Whoa! That was fun! Time really flies when you engage in pointless violence.
(Gen 1:9) After making sure the Heavens wouldn’t fall back on his head, God looks at the waters beneath. They surely don’t seem as scary now as they had before. Actually, God can even sense there’s something big and flat at their bottom. After a better look, he sees that it is the Earth! The Earth was under the water all this time! God takes a brief moment to consider if The Word may be malfunctioning, what with creating empty heavens and unwarranted layers concealing the ground, but, presently, he orders the waters to step aside.
(Gen 1:10) Seeing the new dry ground makes God so happy that he decides to name it “land.” He feels rather silly, as there’s clearly no one around for him to communicate. Nevertheless, he decides to spare a portion of the water in a corner (it may come handy later) and to call it “sea”.
(Gen 1:11-12) The “land” certainly looked like a great play field, so God decides to use it to experiment with The Word. He gets distracted creating lots of different organisms on it, but then suddenly…
(Gen 1:13) everything goes dark!
(Gen 1:14-15) God notices the lights are still going on and off, as he had not ordered them to stop. As soon as the next morning breaks, he notices the photons are not coming from any direction in particular. To fix their odd behavior, he re-arranges them in two shiny lumps and a series of little spots to keep things visible even when it was night. It was not a perfect solution, he admitted, but at least it was better than before.
(Gen 1:16-18) As the land was already too crowded with plants, God placed his new lights in the sky. Surprisingly, they didn’t sink in the waters of the Heavens, just floated around.
(Gen 1:19) God decides that it was a good thing if the lights continued to alternate, so he wouldn’t lose track of time. Of course, he did not remember creating time in the first place, but as it was already here there was no point in ignoring it.
(Gen 1:20-21) Seeing that the air and the seas were now too empty in comparison with the Heavens and the Earth, God proceeds to use The Word to fill them with creatures.
(Gen 1:22-23) God is so pleased with his new feathered and scaly friends that he hugs every single one of them.
(Gen 1:24-25) Looking back at the land, he decides that plants were boring and not such a good idea in the first place, and starts to fill it with land animals. He rejoices on his new furry friends and hugs them as well.
(Gen 1:26-27) Upon realizing that he had to have arms to hug everybody, God examines himself. Even though he didn’t recall creating his body either, he notices that he is one good-looking fellow. It was a shame that there weren’t any more things like him. With a command of “Let us make mankind in our image”, The Word creates a gazillion new human beings. They weren’t exact replicas of him, but they were good enough for God. Mankind questions him about what he meant by “us”, but God simply shrugs off. He was not sure, but it sounded appropriate at the moment.
(Gen 1:28-31) Mankind shrug, too. They look around and see all this happy plants and animals. They tell God that they surely look tasty and ask what they should do with them. God replies that they can rip, burn and kill them if they liked, as he could always make more with The Word. The animals are not pleased.
(Gen 2:1-2) Satisfied, God concludes that his creation of the Heavens and the Earth, whatever it was meant by such words, is complete. Only then did he notice how tiresome this whole ordeal has been. He retreats into his holy bed, not noticing how strange it was that an all-powerful being required rest.
(Gen 2:3) Unable to sleep with all the noise humans were doing while throwing their wild party of slaughter and havoc, God orders all of them to take a break and be quiet till next day. They grudgingly abide. Satisfied, God closes his eyes and has sweet dreams…
. . .
(Gen 2:4-5) It is very dark in here. Hardly anything can be seen. God opens his eyelids only to find barren land stretching in all directions. God blinks and rubs his eyes. He can’t believe it, but part of his creation is gone. Where is the sea, the plants, the animals and the humans? Was all that a hallucination? Or perhaps a dream? He inspects his pockets and finds a new item shoved into one of them. It is a card written in crayon. It reads “Hello! My name is YHWH.” God looks desperately over his shoulders for who could have left this message, but there´s obviously nobody in sight. He takes a deep breath and tries to calm himself down. Perhaps his name was YHWH all the time, and he merely left a message for himself. Of course, he knew he’d forget it and left himself a note. It was a reasonable explanation.
(Gen 2:6) God looks around again and notices this time the ground is rather soaked. He decides to leave all this creation business behind, as he was not sure what happened with his previous creatures. Perhaps excessive use had depleted the power of The Word. Perhaps The Word was evil. He doesn’t care anymore and instead sits on the mud and starts playing with it. Yay, that is fun!
(Gen 2:7) With the mud, God makes a replica of one of the humans he thought he had created before. It was much more fun to create clay creatures than real ones, he thought. They couldn’t possibly do anything annoying such as noisy parties or outright bizarre such as mysteriously disappearing. However, there seems to be something odd about this statue. God leans closer to its eyes. God blinks. The clay man blinks back, saying “hi.” God screams in terror.
… Behind a nearby rock, a slim reptilian creature operates a radio. “Our plan is working, Tezcatlipoca. He thinks he’s the only god and that he created the universe. Now it’s time to release the real weird stuff.”
PZ, I suggest a picture of a zombie sockpuppet for the next incarnation of this thread (assuming such a picture exists, and further assuming this thread is granted a new incarnation).
I say put 40,000 volts through it and see what happens.
voom!
Interesting. Not the result I expected.
*makes note in lab book*
A. R:
June 3rd, 2012 at 4:18 pm
Hmm, it would appear the Raj’s link with the collective has been temporarily broken, given the lack of incredulous stupidity on the thread recently.
kemist, Dark Lord of the Sith:
June 3rd, 2012 at 6:53 pm
Interesting. Not the result I expected.
*makes note in lab book*
I say let’s keep testing till we run out of cake.
But there’s no sense crying
Over every mistake.
You just keep on trying
Till you run out of cake.
And the science gets done.
And you make a neat gun
For the people who are
Still alive.
Hey, Chigau. The weather here finally warmed up and the sun is out, it’s summer! I sat in the sun for a bit today, now I’m trying to be a good needle slave and get some work done. Would it be bad if I asked how your tomatoes are doing?
chigau (違う):
June 4th, 2012 at 6:43 pm
Caine
Thanks for the reminder, I haven’t watered today.
Tomatoes are OK, just a bit slow.
Haven’t planted potatoes yet. It may be too late.
A. R:
June 4th, 2012 at 10:35 pm
chigau: That would depend on the variety (i.e. maincrop or early). I got mine in about a week after Jeebus on a stick day.
theophontes (坏蛋):
June 4th, 2012 at 11:05 pm
I left my plants in over the winter. It never gets cold enough here for them to die completely. But aside from the spearmint, they are not very happy plants. In fact the mint is quite miserable. The chilli plant was murdered by a rodent last season and its pot has been overgrown by weeds.
*sniff*
theophontes (坏蛋):
June 4th, 2012 at 11:06 pm
{theophontes brightens up}
I haz zombieplants!!!
John Morales:
June 4th, 2012 at 11:16 pm
I remember when the Rajamuffin first appeared, all puffed-up posturing and feisty braggadocio.
(Need MOAR specimens)
theophontes (坏蛋):
June 4th, 2012 at 11:57 pm
@ John
all puffed-up posturing and feisty braggadocio.
Yeah, his vacuous arguments dried up and he degenerated into a common or garden troll.
Aaah, zombie strawmen? Our neverdead farm is coming together beautifully.
David Marjanović:
June 5th, 2012 at 12:15 pm
I have my own abstract written. Would be interesting to compare.
Heh.
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
June 5th, 2012 at 12:21 pm
tzt is creepin
Aratina Cage:
June 5th, 2012 at 12:31 pm
tzt is creepin
…me out.
Louis:
June 5th, 2012 at 12:35 pm
Since this is now the Official Meen™ Thread and TET is fluffy and contains pillows:
Fuck everything and everyone.
That is all.
Love
Louis
Aratina Cage:
June 5th, 2012 at 12:39 pm
Dearheart Louis,
I’ll pray for you.
Jesus lurvs you!
–Aratina
Louis:
June 5th, 2012 at 12:56 pm
Aratina,
I See What You Did There™.
Goood. Gooooooood.
Louis
Antiochus Epiphanes:
June 5th, 2012 at 1:13 pm
1. Fie on all of you.
2. I never felt safe posting my favorite recipes in TET, because they are not good. However, the now-broadened and by-the-dumpster-next-to-the-grease-trap vibe of TZT seems an appropriate venue for discussing one of my favorite lunch recipes. Egg Salad Burrito
a. Place a plain flour tortilla on really more plastic wrap then you need. Decide that this is wasteful, and try to use the serrated edge of the plastic wrap box to sever, like, one third of the plastic wrap that you have already dispensed. Do not for a second consider what use the severed third will be to anyone.
b. Fucking that up, you will now have one piece of plastic wrap that is too small to be good for anything and one that is so stretched, that you doubt its integrity. Go back to step “a”, and repeat the process until your guilt at wasting plastic wrap is not so strong as your rage at failing even the simplest fucking task. Then move on to step “c”.
c. Ok. Now, I hope someone in your house has made hard-boiled eggs because if not you are shit out of luck. Peel one hard-boiled egg, being sure to tear off a good quarter of the egg-white with the shell, exposing the greenish yoke. Maybe the yolk looks disgusting now, but we’ll fix that in step “d”. Remove exactly as much of the shell from the largest intact piece as you are completely unwilling to ingest.
d. Place the decroded shell-free-ish egg on the burrito and mash the shit out of it with a fork. Then mash in some pickle relish* and a squirt of mayonnaise. Dress with exactly as much hot sauce is required to either hide the greenish yolk-tinge or at least make it look festive. Oh, yeah. Add lots of salt and pepper.
e. Fail to wrap the tortilla around the mess you made of it so that the egg salad squirts out the top and sides. Bonus if you can manage to fold the tortilla so that it splits, allowing egg salad to sort of spread disgustingly on the plastic wrap below it.
f. Do your best to wrap this clusterfuck that you made for lunch with the plastic wrap, but don’t count on it holding, because like some kind of cheap asshole, you always buy the cheapest, shittiest plastic wrap on the planet.
g. Reproach yourself for even bothering. Don’t plan to eat lunch with anyone, unless you want a lot of comments about how sub-par your lunch is.
*I prefer dill-pickle relish with everything.
Aratina Cage:
June 5th, 2012 at 1:28 pm
@Louis
Horrible idea. Considering all Teh Zombies lumbering about, I think the correct answer is that the foot is gamey. ;)
@Antiochus Epiphanes
I never felt safe posting my favorite recipes in TET, because they are not good.
It’s funny because it’s true. But what good is a mouthwatering recipe like yours doing on TZT without a good long squirt of catsup on top?
Antiochus Epiphanes:
June 5th, 2012 at 1:37 pm
But what good is a mouthwatering recipe like yours doing on TZT without a good long squirt of catsup on top?
*growls*
ketchup!
But you are completely correct. It goes good with just about anything. I was saving up this masterpiece, but here goes.
Cold Hot-dog with Warm Ketchup
a. Garnish an uncooked hotdog with ketchup from packets in the junk drawer.
consciousness razor:
June 5th, 2012 at 1:58 pm
Antiochus, TZT isn’t the appropriate place for posting recipes, unless they include lots of brains. Maybe the Food Network’s website would accept your submissions if you told them you are the Seleucid king.
chigau (違う):
June 5th, 2012 at 2:04 pm
We can post recipes here. Baked Beans
open tin of beans
eat
(spoon optional)
consciousness razor:
June 5th, 2012 at 2:09 pm
You get the ones with hunks of brains in them, right? Hard to find a good brand. Most of them never put very many in there.
chigau (違う):
June 5th, 2012 at 2:17 pm
They usually have a chunk of whiteish something.
Is that the brainz?
Antiochus Epiphanes:
June 5th, 2012 at 2:19 pm
CR:
Antiochus, TZT isn’t the appropriate place for posting recipes, unless they include lots of brains.
Fair enough.
Let’s replace this:
…Reproach yourself for even bothering. Don’t plan to eat lunch with anyone, unless you want a lot of comments about how sub-par your lunch is.
with this
h. Join friends or colleagues for lunch, but leave the egg salad burrito in your backpack. You won’t be needing it. Crack open one of their skulls, exposing the grayish matter within. Maybe brains looks disgusting now, but we’ll fix that in step “i”.
i. Mash the shit out of the exposed brain with a fork. Then mash in some pickle relish*, and a squirt each of mayonnaise and ketchup. Dress with hot sauce or not. Eat without self-awareness.
————————————-
Maybe the Food Network’s website would accept your submissions if you told them you are the Seleucid king.
My naïf: I first employed that strategy more than 12 years ago. They quickly went from snide little “Thanks for your submission, but unfortunately…” type form letters to a general restraining order. And cancellation of my subscription to their magazine, reactionary snobs. The Seleucids haven’t had much respect since the whole “Roman Conquest” debacle.
consciousness razor:
June 5th, 2012 at 2:33 pm
Thank you, Antiochus. I can accept that substitution. Seems like a lot of prep work in steps a.-f., but I’ll have to try it out.
My naïf: I first employed that strategy more than 12 years ago.
Sorry, I didn’t realize. What fuckers. Don’t despair, though. I’m sure one of these days, the Seleucids will back and better than ever. Then Food Network can be razed to the ground.
cm's changeable moniker:
June 5th, 2012 at 2:33 pm
David M, it’s only in my head, so if you were serious, don’t go all, you know, thorough or anything!
(For the record, ChasCP would have supplied the title and the “question we set out to explore”. The rest would just be context, evidence, or exegesis.)
Aratina Cage:
June 5th, 2012 at 2:41 pm
I can’t wait to hear where ChasCP falls on the catsup←→ketchup divide. Catsup: it’s what’s for innards.
cm's changeable moniker:
June 5th, 2012 at 2:42 pm
AE:
Reproach yourself for even bothering.
All bad food requires a glass of self-loathing to wash it down!
mikmik:
June 5th, 2012 at 5:11 pm
consciousness razor
Antiochus, TZT isn’t the appropriate place for posting recipes, unless they include lots of brains.
Y’know, it was Britain creating all the fuss in March of 1996 that we had to stop including brains in our processed meat. Now, our wieners don’t have any nutritional value at all!
That’s why I buy the chicken hot dogs exclusively – they taste worse, and they might have some nutrition in them.
Antiochus Epiphanes
i. Mash the shit out of the exposed brain with a fork.
I can never remember, is that called the curds or the whey?
Ichthyic:
June 5th, 2012 at 5:13 pm
Any sign of anti-gormless yet?
*preps zombie torture tools*
A. R:
June 5th, 2012 at 5:26 pm
Ichthyic: If you want, I think I still have a few industrial grade log scale irony meters in one of the cargo bays of the LOLstar. There might be a godbot poker in there too.
Ichthyic:
June 5th, 2012 at 5:30 pm
There might be a godbot poker in there too.
yeah, mine’s kinda dull from overuse, come to think of it.
*looks askance*
how much?
Ichthyic:
June 5th, 2012 at 5:34 pm
btw, I studied my creo-zombie torture techniques while living with the Huron.
Ichthyic: That depends on how many I have. I’ll look… {A. R beams up to LOLstar [don't you judge me for mixing my SciFi up), comes back with a giant crate of godbot pokers, and crates of irony meters and stupid shields.] Looks like I stocked up when Danielhaven was here, come and get them everyone, they’re free! Don’t forget to take a stupid shield and a log scale irony meter, you never know what levels of stupid a godbot can unleash when poked enough, and I don’t want injuries from parts flying off of exploding standard issue irony meters.
Ichthyic:
June 5th, 2012 at 5:46 pm
free
hmm
*looks suspicious*
there is no free lunch.
A. R:
June 5th, 2012 at 5:58 pm
Ichthyic: If it’ll make you feel better, I’ll take 100 bars of gold-pressed latinum for the lot. Or you can help me annihilate the godbot.
Phalacrocorax, aus der Dritte Welt:
June 5th, 2012 at 6:29 pm
I think The Zombie Thread should be unified with The Illithid Thread to keep all the creepy fantasy creatures in the same place.
If you zoom in on it a lot, it looks like you can even see a little distortion from Venus’ atmosphere, but I don’t know. That might just be an artifact from the camera.
Antiochus Epiphanes:
June 5th, 2012 at 7:04 pm
Aratina, 469:
I’m willing to wager adventurously on teh “ketchup” side.
Now is the winter of our discontent, made glorious summer by this sun of… Hey! Egg salad burritos! Why, yes I shall.
By the by, what have y’all done with the trolls? Except for the cedarbrained illithid misogynistically spouting drivel on some stale thread, it seems quiet around these parts.
…York. And then something about clouds.
Ichthyic:
June 5th, 2012 at 8:56 pm
By the by, what have y’all done with the trolls?
well, PZ was SUPPOSED to be minding the gates, but he took off for some fictional place called “iceland” (yeah, as if there’s someplace made of ice phhht), and left the damn gate open.
they escaped.
Aratina Cage:
June 5th, 2012 at 9:20 pm
@Antiochus Epiphanes
What’s important is whether catsup or ketchup was applied first to tomato ketchup. :D (That’s the only way forward for catsup I fear, because I think you are probably right about that.) I prefer catsup for TZT because it reminds me of the anti-Caturday posts.
cm's changeable moniker:
June 5th, 2012 at 9:25 pm
Over on the Real Scientists thread, this:
So either you cannot read for understanding worth beans, Illithid, or you are lying, yet again.
… which is kinda resonant. Pitbull, sit down here?
There’s room for many (if we’re honest).
Antiochus Epiphanes:
June 5th, 2012 at 9:50 pm
Aratina: Point eruditely made*. I prefer “ketchup” because that’s what Heinz makes.
*I mean, fie!
Phalacrocorax, aus der Dritte Welt:
June 5th, 2012 at 10:18 pm
*squawk*
I thought I was having some sort of hallucination. First, I saw a series of dano’s comments celebrating the victory of guvnor Walker. But, as soon as I reloaded the page, the posts were all gone! Every single one of them. I checked the news, and saw that it was the depressing truth: Walker was bound to win. So, what were those vanishing messages? My imagination? But how could they be accurate if I didn’t remember the recall election was today? Prescience? A message from the afterlife?
Full of dread, I decided to check the dungeon and realized that the awful truth lay on the latter option. As I saw those fateful words engraved in moss-covered stone, I knew I’d never forget them. dano was gone! Forever! And we never got the chance to play with him here!
*sobs*
ibyea:
June 5th, 2012 at 10:36 pm
Wait, how the heck did Gov Walker survive a recall election? Who were the idiots who voted for him, and why would they be stupid enough to vote for him if they saw what he was doing against the unions?
Wait, how the heck did Gov Walker survive a recall election?
voter suppression and wads of Koch-cash spent on anti-union, anti-recall propaganda
John Morales:
June 5th, 2012 at 11:01 pm
Hey, Jadehawk.
I remember you wrote “anyway, I don’t want to hang around the stupid, quarantined trolls, but TET is becoming increasingly less useful for discussion, too.”
As you can see, the latest specimen has ceased to react to stimulus, and we are bereft for the nonce.
(This makes zombie hunger grow, and as it does, so does the irritation — then, what everyone is waiting for: Cannibalistic Zombie Carnage Ensues!)
I’m guessing you just saw that Scott Walker won his recall election?
overwhelmingly?
how the FUCK does that work?
there have been 3 recall elections for governors in US history, all have been suspect. I was there for the recall of Gray Davis in CA.
there were ten TIMES more reasons to recall Scott Walker, and yet he becomes the very first governor ever to win a recall election.
*shakes head sadly*
Ichthyic:
June 6th, 2012 at 12:39 am
dano was gone! Forever! And we never got the chance to play with him here!
*kicks rock*
awwww mannn!
:(
theophontes (坏蛋):
June 6th, 2012 at 12:48 am
Re: Food
I don’t have my own pix with me, but Gansu Province is famous for its sheep’s head soup. . I have not had the chance to eat some for a while, but the barbecued spinal cord I had in Xian recently was to die for.
…
Book recommendation (especially for ‘Merkins): The Battle for Spain, by Antony Beevor. Quote (my emphasis):
They despised politicians and had a virulent hatred of ‘reds’, a term including liberals and all those opposed to a right-wing dictatorship. It was an attitude which Mola expressed with all clarity in his instructions for the rising: “He who is not with us is against us.”
Another interesting aspect: The (fascist) nationalists used the colonial army’s Moroccan reguliers for terrorist acts against their own people. To get the reguliers fired up for the fray, they accused the Republic of wanting to abolish Allah.
John Morales:
June 6th, 2012 at 12:49 am
Oh hey, Ichthyic, someone on the (stupid?) thread asked about Enzed, and I pointed them to you at TET.
(Sam has got the same fur colouring as Ms Molly (our cat))
Aaaaaaw. Sam looks a great deal like Esme, their colouring is very close. Havelock is our first black rat. I updated again, over in that other thread. ;p
Havelock has been doing magnificently, he’s an explorer and has a calm nature. Sam is a screamer and on the dramatic side. Esme & Havelock are quite taken with one another. Rubin has been helping Sam to cope.
Sam finally stopped hiding and made his way back upstairs, and discovered the dish of chocolate Ensure. He hath declared it good.
Esme and Rubin have been so good and very accepting of the new boys, which is such a relief. Of course, it’s early days, so I don’t want to speak too soon, but right now, it’s all looking good. :D
theophontes (坏蛋):
June 6th, 2012 at 1:55 am
@ Caine
I see your rattehz and raise you two kittehz: molly & maxxie
Tricky question, Reverend, due to its multiple meanings. You could be asking where had the dano gone to, the answer of which would be, of course, under the happy bridge to Valhalla, where all the banned trolls live in eternal bliss, able to brag to each other about the time when they were hit by the almighty banhammer.
On the other hand, Your Chimpness could be inquiring on where on earth did we not get the chance to play with dano, as he seemed to be sharing his most profound musings with us on every single thread lately. While true, I still regret that he was never properly studied under controlled conditions here in the Zombie Lab.
The bullcrap above is a public service brought to you by your pal Phal. *squawk* Was that bullcrap useful for you? Don’t let me know!
*leaps from the perch and flies away*
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
June 6th, 2012 at 10:52 am
…….
A. R:
June 6th, 2012 at 2:01 pm
Warning, scifi has been sighted on the creobot video thread.
Rev. BDC, Dano is in the dungeon, with only ‘spammer’ listed as the reason. I think he was banhammered after posting in the Get out of Louisiana thread.
dianne:
June 6th, 2012 at 3:02 pm
Wait a minute. People are here chatting about kittens and rats and other pets? I thought this thread was only for shouting matches and dismemberment of creationists.
Antiochus Epiphanes:
June 6th, 2012 at 3:19 pm
dianne: That’s a goddamned lie.
But also, you’re right. Damn the cuddly! A canker upon the cute!
Dano went on a spamming spree, posting the same one liner about the Wisconsin election on numerous threads — including resurrecting old threads that had nothing to do with Wisconsin or politics. All of which were caught and deleted, along with himself.
chigau (違う):
June 6th, 2012 at 8:42 pm
It’s really windy here.
John Morales:
June 6th, 2012 at 9:03 pm
At least it’s not scented with carrion-troll spoor, right now.
theophontes (坏蛋):
June 6th, 2012 at 10:55 pm
@ dianne / Antiochus Epiphanes
People are here chatting about kittens and rats and other pets?
Damn the cuddly! A canker upon the cute!
It is a matter of perspective. Both rats and cats are really cold blooded killers:
Kitten devouring rabbit (do not click if you like rabbits.)
Their cold-blooded killing instincts make them the perfect denizens of TZT. (The consequent zombie rabbits are a bonus.)
Ichthyic:
June 7th, 2012 at 4:17 am
speaking of killing things with fire…
I just perfected my cajun-blackened kingfish with carmelized peas and onions over rice.
I love it when my own cooking turns out better than I expected.
sadly, I have no live witnesses to this event; buffybot is downtown with her LSG crew.
:(
I can post the recipe though:
-kingfish fillet (any firm-fleshed fish will do; 1/2″ – 3/4″ thick)
-half onion (red or white)
-half cup of peas (fresh or frozen)
-1 teaspoon cajun seasoning (double if it’s on the mild side, or add 1/4tsp red pepper flakes for extra heat, or you can make it from scratch if you know how)
-half cup dark soy sauce (the thick stuff, not “kikoman table sauce”)
-1 tblspn maple syrup. yeah, you heard me. in fact, make it 1.5
-half lemon (squeeze the juice into the mixing bowl with the rest, then just toss the peel in there too)
-1 tsp grated fresh ginger
-1 tsp ground garlic (or 2 regular sized cloves, mashed)
-1.5 cup water
-1/2 tsp basil (dried)
-1/2 tsp tarragon (dried)
-1/2 tsp marjoram or oregano
-1/4 cup white wine (red will do too)
-olive oil
-high temp cooking oil (anything works here)
Cut the onion into half-inch chunks, approximately, and mix in a bowl with everything but oil and the fish and the peas.
Take a casserole dish, or equivalent, and coat the bottom of it with a bit of olive oil. put your fish fillet in, and cover it with the mixture from the bowl. The liquid should immerse the fish at least halfway deep; find a smaller container if not.
Marinate the fish at least 30 mins, then turn and marinate another 30 mins.
good to cook up some rice while this is going on; I always like to give my rice a chance to sit a bit before dishing it up.
the next part requires some way to apply fast heat to a grill surface. you can use a grill-pan on a BBQ, or a cast-iron grill pan on a stove (a flat pan will cause the coating to stick, and it won’t turn out right).
remove your fish from the marinade and pat lightly dry with a paper towel or similar.
in a saucepan, combine the onions (from the marinade), peas, and about 1/2 cup of the marinade in a pan with 1/4 olive oil, and another 1/4 cup of water. Bring to a boil, then simmer until onions begin to clarify. remove from heat. The sauce should have thickened up a bit, and have just enough to pour on the rice and fish for flavor. not too much!
put your high-temp oil on the grill pan, and WAIT UNTIL IT IS SMOKING HOT. literally, the oil should be close to bursting into flame. The purpose here is to sear the outside of the fish very quickly, sealing in the juices and flavor.
take your fish fillet, and plop it on the smoking hot grill pan. it might try to stick in the early stages, so wiggle a spatula under it if so; once the outer surface is actually cooked, it won’t stick any more. go for about a minute on one side (just to get the crust going), then flip it over – on a different part of the grill pan that is still smoking hot – and give it another minute. now, turn down the heat so it is below smoking temp, and cook each side another minute (two if it’s a thick piece).
make a bed of cooked rice on a platter, and put your fish on top. pour the onion/pea mixture on top of the fish and rice.
them’s good eats!
Antiochus Epiphanes:
June 7th, 2012 at 7:47 am
What a lovely recipe. It would be inappropriate for this macabre thread absent its cannibalistic underpinnings
Theophontes, rats are predators. You don’t want to see what they’d do to a mouse…
chigau (違う):
June 7th, 2012 at 11:53 am
A. R
snow *shudder*
Bright sunshine and +20° here.
Ichthyic:
June 7th, 2012 at 4:22 pm
It would be inappropriate for this macabre thread absent its cannibalistic underpinnings
well, I did catch the kingfish (19kg)and prepare it myself
should I add a colorful and bloody story to that effect?
ogremeister:
June 7th, 2012 at 4:24 pm
The stuff falling on Colorado Springs last night wasn’t snow, but hail. And if there are any meteorologists around, I’m curious if there’s a term for this kind of cloud formation that dropped it:
That’s it! Many thanks. Have never seen them before this storm before.
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
June 7th, 2012 at 4:43 pm
after letting the back jungle… I mean yard go far to long due to a number of colliding circumstances (rain, broken lawnmower, dying dog, work travel… um…. beer festival) I finally mowed it today.
Halfway through mowing next to the fence that backs up to a city owned field with off shore radio antennae I realized
HOLY FUCKING SHIT
That’s poison ivy.
uh
I’m very allergic / reactive to poison ivy.
The next few days / weeks should be interesting.
fuckity fuck fuck
Ichthyic:
June 7th, 2012 at 4:44 pm
they are associated with high energy storms.
it’s no wonder there was hail!
in other areas of the US, you’d be eyeing those carefully to watch for tornado generation.
Ichthyic:
June 7th, 2012 at 4:45 pm
I’m very allergic / reactive to poison ivy.
oops.
OK, do you know how to remove the oils safely from your skin?
Ichthyic:
June 7th, 2012 at 4:47 pm
tip:
DO NOT TAKE A HOT SHOWER.
I would use something to try and denature the oil; it’s quite stable.
Poison ivy is difficult but not impossible to eradicate. The chief difficulty lies in being poisoned when trying to remove it. Wear protective clothing, including gloves, whenever you are working near it. Pulling and grubbing are effective means of removal, though they necessitate close contact and will probably need to be repeated once or twice for complete control. If time is not an object, the vines can be smothered by completely covering them with black plastic for several months. Do not mow the plants as this will spew bits and pieces of poisonous material over the area. When removing poison ivy, take frequent breaks to change clothes and scrub thoroughly with a strong soap. Wash contaminated clothing separately. DO NOT BURN any plants. The resulting smoke can cause severe lung damage if inhaled.
Certain herbicides are effective and allow you to control the plant without getting too close to it. Most herbicides for poison ivy control contain triclopyr. This chemical is systemic. It is absorbed by leaves and transferred to stems and roots, and slowly causes the death of the entire plant. It must be applied to an actively growing plant for this process to take place; do not apply it during a drought when even poison ivy will not be growing. Triclopyr is nonselective and will kill any other plants it contacts.
Roundup, Rodeo and other herbicides containing glyphosate don’t work on poison ivy and poison oak. They kill the leaves but don’t touch the roots, which sprout new leaves within a week or two.
Woe for me! A supposed-to-be-25-minute train journey home took two and a half hours. (Stupid fires in stupid tunnels. Can’t the trains just drive through them at high speed, Hollywood-style?)
Woe is Firefox 13! Look, a new tab being blank was boring, but if you’re going to jazz it up with recent history, couldn’t you have at least added an option to make it open my frickin’ default home page by default? It still takes one click to get there, but now I have to decide where to click.
DO NOT BURN any plants. The resulting smoke can cause severe lung damage if inhaled
Truth.
At a fire in northern California, seven firefighters went to the hospital in three days because of lung irritation thanks to the oils from poison ivy, poison oak and poison sumac. This is why I bring cigars to forest fires: sometimes it is more soothing than the smoke from the fires.
(Stupid fires in stupid tunnels. Can’t the trains just drive through them at high speed, Hollywood-style?)
Nonononononono!
If the tunnel is older and has wooden bents, the entire tunnel can collapse. If the tunnel has steel bents, the fire can weaken the steel and the tunnel can collapse. If the tunnel is lined with brick or concrete, the expansion from the heat of the fire can drop large chunks of liner onto the tracks. If the tunnel is unlined, thermal expansion can drop BFRs (Big Rocks) onto the tracks. The net result of all of these, coupled with a train racing through at high speed, would be a derailment or a catastrophic deceleration event. Both of which require shitloads of paperwork.
Wow. A fire story (short) and train shit in the same post.
I feel so proud.
cm's changeable moniker:
June 7th, 2012 at 8:49 pm
Sorry, forgot. Obligatory weather report: windy. A demain.
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
June 7th, 2012 at 8:53 pm
yeah I’m dumb, but not that dumb. I didn’t / wouldn’t burn them.
However now I’m stuck with eradication of it.
Do you think drinking heavily and staring at it with a raised eyebrow will do the trick.
If need be I can turn it into a scowl and maybe even give a few disapproving “hummmms”.
cm's changeable moniker:
June 7th, 2012 at 8:55 pm
Except:
I don’t think it was a big fire. In fact, another train (carrying me) drove (at normal speed) through the aftermath after a mere two hours.
Apparently, this can happen when badgers short out the third rail.
Exploding badgers. Who knew?
'Tis Himself:
June 7th, 2012 at 9:02 pm
cm’s changeable moniker
If you look in the upper right hand corner of the Firefox 13 home page (the one with all the pictures of the last porn sites you visited), you’ll see a botton with nine small boxes in it. Click on the button and the thumbnails all go away. You still have to navigate to your home page (I know, why isn’t the homepage the default?) but the annoying thumbnails aren’t there.
Ogvorbis: Ignorant sycophantic magpie.:
June 7th, 2012 at 9:03 pm
cm:
And I can guarantee that, during the two hour gap, there were multiple inspectors checking the integrity of the electrical system, the rails, and the structure of the tunnel itself. Even after a minor fire.
There are no minor fires in a railroad tunnel.
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
June 7th, 2012 at 9:05 pm
badgers?
we don’t need no stinkin badgers
'Tis Himself:
June 7th, 2012 at 9:12 pm
Rev BDC, you not only owe me a new keyboard but also a glass of Bowmore Enigma 12 year old single malt.
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
June 7th, 2012 at 9:15 pm
Rev BDC, you not only owe me a new keyboard but also a glass of Bowmore Enigma 12 year old single malt.
Well then, I have work to do.
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 7th, 2012 at 9:29 pm
‘Tis Himself says:
Poison ivy is difficult but not impossible to eradicate. The chief difficulty lies in being poisoned when trying to remove it. Wear protective clothing, including gloves, whenever you are working near it. Pulling and grubbing are effective means of removal, though they necessitate close contact and will probably need to be repeated once or twice for complete control. If time is not an object, the vines can be smothered by completely covering them with black plastic for several months. Do not mow the plants as this will spew bits and pieces of poisonous material over the area. When removing poison ivy, take frequent breaks to change clothes and scrub thoroughly with a strong soap. Wash contaminated clothing separately. DO NOT BURN any plants. The resulting smoke can cause severe lung damage if inhaled.
Certain herbicides are effective and allow you to control the plant without getting too close to it. Most herbicides for poison ivy control contain triclopyr. This chemical is systemic. It is absorbed by leaves and transferred to stems and roots, and slowly causes the death of the entire plant. It must be applied to an actively growing plant for this process to take place; do not apply it during a drought when even poison ivy will not be growing. Triclopyr is nonselective and will kill any other plants it contacts.
Poison ivy is difficult but not impossible to eradicate. The chief difficulty lies in the chances of becoming poisoned when trying to remove it. Wear protective clothing, including gloves, whenever you are working near it. Pulling and grubbing are effective means of removal, though they necessitate close contact and will probably need to be repeated once or twice for complete control. If time is not an object, the vines can be smothered by completely covering them with black plastic for several months. Do not mow the plants as this will spew bits and pieces of poisonous material over the area. When removing poison ivy, take frequent breaks to change clothes and scrub thoroughly with a strong soap. Wash contaminated clothing separately. DO NOT BURN any plants that you physically remove. The resulting smoke can cause severe lung damage if inhaled.
Herbicides are effective and allow you to control the plant without getting too close to it. Several commercial products are available. Check labels to find one that will control poison ivy, and apply it as directed. Many of the herbicides for poison ivy control contain glyphosate. This chemical is systemic. It is absorbed by leaves and transferred to stems and roots, and slowly causes the death of the entire plant. It must be applied to an actively growing plant for this process to take place; do not apply it during a drought when even poison ivy will not be growing. Glyphosate, like most herbicides labelled for poison ivy removal, is nonselective and will kill any other plants it contacts.
ibyea:
June 7th, 2012 at 9:39 pm
@Icthyic
I didn’t think propaganda from billionares could change people’s mind that much, but apparently, people are that stupid.
theophontes (坏蛋):
June 7th, 2012 at 10:49 pm
@ ogremeister
Thanks for the linkies. Almighty Zeus the Cloud Gatherer is truly awesome!
@ ichthyic
cumulonimbus mamma (mammatus)
Thanks for new term. I first thought they looked like the pope’s chthonic dingleberries, but wouldn’t know how to translate that into Latin.
With regard to groping the pope’s nether regions: Eeeeuw!
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 7th, 2012 at 11:06 pm
Posting this here and mangling nyms so the troll doesn’t notice and can’t google it up later.
isn’t a verb, Chomsky.
Alright, this is definitely Hyprn. That’s a tell. On top of his location, leftish politics, and misogyny, he had a peculiar habit of bringing up Chomsky when not relevant.
Paging PZ, but somebody might copy this elsewhere for his attention?
hotshoe:
June 7th, 2012 at 11:09 pm
At a fire in northern California, seven firefighters went to the hospital in three days because of lung irritation thanks to the oils from poison ivy, poison oak and poison sumac.
CA firefighters encounter poison oak, but never poison ivy nor poison sumac, which do not grow anywhere in CA. But they are all members of the same genus and they all produce the same damaging urushiol, And certainly firefighters in other states have been hospitalized from smoke inhalation of poison oak or poison sumac.
Certain parts of the midwest and south, it could be both poison ivy and poison sumac in the same field. Ouch ouch!
Alright, this is definitely Hyprn. That’s a tell. On top of his location, leftish politics, and misogyny, he had a peculiar habit of bringing up Chomsky when not relevant.
but then where did his higher education go, and his distaste for African Americans and other non-white immigrants?
unfortunately, I suspect there’s simply a cultural milieu in the UK from which the Hyperon archetype spring. for all i know, they are all on the same mailing list or something.
Posting this here and mangling nyms so the troll doesn’t notice and can’t google it up later.
oops
theophontes (坏蛋):
June 7th, 2012 at 11:37 pm
@ Caine
Anyone doubting that rats are ideal subject matter on TZT should look up or google “Rat King”.
@ Rev
I used to believe that poison ivy type dermatitis was something restricted to the USA. I learned the hard way that this is not the case after scratching my wrist in rural China. After a few days the skin broke out in lumpy blisters that lasted for weeks.
It appears that the Chinese have their own source of Urushiol in the Chinese Lacquer Tree. In fact just touching lacquered objects can cause an outbreak similar to poison ivy.
and on an unrelated note… I wonder if “pain” from illness can feel the same as hunger in some instances? because I have a very hard time believing one could be hurting this much everywhere between waist and neck and still feel hungry no matter how much one eats…
*sigh*
i hate being ill
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 7th, 2012 at 11:43 pm
oops
Oh well :) I knew there was a very good chance it would happen anyway.
but then where did his higher education go,
I thought this incarnation just said he didn’t have a comp sci degree.
Hyperon might have finished his physics degree?
and his distaste for African Americans and other non-white immigrants?
I think it’s still there, a bit veiled (his praise for East Asian immigrants is the same).
It took three attempts before he would answer my “and how about black people in Britain” question, and then he didn’t really answer it, so I clarified and asked a fourth time; he still wouldn’t answer.
What he would say is that twenty-first century Britons and Americans of all skin colors have terrible “work ethic”, but he would not respond to questions about whether some skin colors are more terrible than others.
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 7th, 2012 at 11:47 pm
and on an unrelated note… I wonder if “pain” from illness can feel the same as hunger in some instances?
Do you have your appendix? This was a symptom for my then BF for about a week prior to developing acute appendicitis.
O.o
I do have my appendix. appendicitis would be distinctly not good. though, most of the pain seems to be in the chest & stomach area, not below, so probably not appendix?
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:11 am
Hell yes it is!
I hope it turns out to be something treatable with generic medications.
and it’s refusing to go away by itself, so I bit the bullet and made an appointment at the Poor People Clinic to figure out wtf this is.
I’m glad you did, because it sounds like it could be serious.
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:12 am
“Hell yes it is [expensive]!”
Not “[appendix]!”
Yikes.
theophontes (坏蛋):
June 8th, 2012 at 12:18 am
@ Jadehawk
and on an unrelated note… I wonder if “pain” from illness can feel the same as hunger in some instances?
In my experience, the signals can be a bit confusing. I used to go fishing of the coast and would sometimes experience sea sickness. The stomach pain and nausea would seem to go on forever until I realised I had not eaten anything since the night before. Actually eating something helped.
Tethys:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:19 am
Chest pain and stomach pain does not sound like appendicitis. I remember there being some digestive pain and disturbance, but no chest pain.
I hope you are feeling better soon. Being sick is no damn fun.
I hope it turns out to be something treatable with generic medications.
fuck yes. and hopefully diagnosable without the use of expensive equipment. last such visit cost me $1000 (though that was at a regular clinic, not the PPC), just to be told it’s harmless and will eventually go away by itself
Jadehawk, have you tried drinking milk? If that makes you feel better, it might be an ulcer. I know that sometimes, eating makes you feel better if you have an ulcer, so you feel hungry all the time.
Aratina Cage:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:26 am
‘Tis Himself #41
Will you please stop this copypasta+tinymod madness of yours? Just let us know when you are copying and pasting, OK, then everything is good.
theophontes (坏蛋):
June 8th, 2012 at 12:31 am
Ooops, should have refreshed. Appendicitis may imply NOT eating (My comments are not medical advice. Good that you are seeking proper medical attention.)
Owlmirror:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:34 am
Woe is Firefox 13! Look, a new tab being blank was boring, but if you’re going to jazz it up with recent history, couldn’t you have at least added an option to make it open my frickin’ default home page by default? It still takes one click to get there, but now I have to decide where to click.
Do you like boring? I like boring.
1) about:config
2) browser.newtab.url
3) change value of above from “about:newtab” to “about:blank”.
Tada!
Boring again.
Or!
You can change it to be the same URL of your home page. Which sounds like it is what you actually want.
Jadehawk, have you tried drinking milk?that seems to primarily provide very temporary relief from the chest pain; still ridiculously hungry though…
Gen, Uppity Ingrate.:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:47 am
I JUST had my appendix removed due to appendicitis! Like two weeks ago! I just had the stitches removed last Friday. Luckily for me (and you won’t believe how very grateful I was about this!), I live in a country where an operation like that can be done on public healthcare, so I wasn’t bankrupted by this as I would have been in other places *cough* US *cough*.
So, symptoms:
Severe, continuous abdominal pain, located at first in the generalized umbilical area but migrating rightwards and lower as time passes. In my case, that took about 18 hours, give or take.
Interesting about this pain was that at first I thought I was in for a bout of diarrhea or some such, only the diarrhea never started – it wasn’t *that* intense. Another interesting thing about the pain was that it was more intense on the rebound – in other words, it does hurt continuously, but if you were to apply pressure on the site, the pain will peak after you stop applying the pressure instead of peaking *while* the pressure is applied, as one would assume.
Apparently there’s also a way to get an indication of whether it’s more likely to be appendicitis by way of blood tests – I can’t remember what it was exactly that they did, though. I might ask my mom if y’all need me to, she’s the one who actually did the blood tests (she’s a tech). But I can confirm – no chest pain.
ibyea:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:53 am
@Gen Uppity Ingrate
I hope I never get appendicitis. I live in that country you just mentioned. :(
that seems to primarily provide very temporary relief from the chest pain; still ridiculously hungry though…
Damn, that does sound like an ulcer. I hope you don’t have one, but if it turns out you do, I hope it’s a tiny one which will heal on its own. When’s your appointment?
However, I just Googled [symptoms hunger pain]. Some are just comment threads, but the 3rd hit was about peptic ulcers, which does have both pain and hunger as possible symptoms.
One paragraph that seemed appropriate:
Ulcer pain may be particularly confusing or disconcerting when it radiates to the back or to the chest behind the breast bone. In such cases it can be confused with other conditions, such as a heart attack.
This is not an actual diagnosis! This is a nerd using the Internet! Your health is important! Seek out professionals for actual diagnoses!
But it wouldn’t hurt to mention to the professionals that you read about peptic ulcers.
Gen, Uppity Ingrate.:
June 8th, 2012 at 1:07 am
Good luck, Jadehawk. Add my wishes to those who are hoping that
a.) it’s something totally minor that can be treated cheaply with generic and easily accessed medications
and
b.) One day very soon the concept of a country *without* a proper public health safety net will be anathema and the US (and other places that need to) will join the rest of us EBIL COMMUNIST EMENIES OF GOD in the world of free universal healthcare.
ibyea:
June 8th, 2012 at 1:17 am
@jadehawk
Get better!
chigau (違う):
June 8th, 2012 at 1:35 am
It’s fully dark, here, and still 22° inside my house.
Maybe I‘ll sleep outside.
Appendicitis almost killed me when I was 9 years old. My parents thought I just had the flu, and being poor, they were just treating the symptoms as well as they could…it was the passing in and out of consciousness that clued them in that something more serious was going on. Most of what I remember is my parents in a complete panic stretching me out on the back seat of the car and then driving like gangbusters for the hospital.
Oh, yeah, I also remember a day of awful agony building up to that.
Apparently I had an emergency appendectomy to remove an acutely infected appendix. None of this namby-pamby modern stuff where they make a tiny little incision and go snip-snip — nah, they slit open my abdomen from groin to about 6 inches up and to the right. I still get doctors examining me who wonder where I got the giant war wound.
what just happened? why are people assuming Lars is being an ass because of the disagreement about ableism we just had elsewhere, instead of granting that he may be making a honest argument?
anyway, I don’t know whether Lars has a point and whether the use of kinks as insults is comparable to ableist slurs, but historically sadomasochism has primarily referred to sexual pleasure, and unlike “sadism” and “masochism” has much weaker non-sexual connotations. plus, argument from dictionary isn’t valid when JT does it to defend the supposed non-gendered nature of “bitching”, so it can hardly be more valid for other words.
just sayin’. if you want to refute Lars, it would help not to try do it JT-style
Well needless to say I’m going to disagree. Shock horror!
1) Lars’ honesty:
When someone starts in with a pretty juvenile (IMO) tu quoque about linguistic usage right after being very politely corrected/informed about the unintended consequences of their demonstrably prejudicial linguistic usage, I am not going out on a limb to bet they are being a {ahem} “less than fulsomely honest interlocutor”. It’s a standard tactic for maintaining their status of “not getting it”. Lars had made a couple of other classic errors as I and others pointed out.
If I’ve made a false positive, a mistaken identification of a dishonest interlocutor, then that’s my bad. I don’t think I have, but I am always happy to be wrong and will cheerfully apologise and admit to that if it is demonstrated to be the case.
2) Kink discrimination:
Not denied, not quibbled with, this unambiguously exists and is not remotely like anything I, or Minnie, said.
3) Dictionaries:
Lars asked for citations of non-sexual usage of “sadomasochism”. I found them. Sadomasochism is the property of possessing both sadistic and masochistic qualities, it is not itself explicitly a sexual term like “bitching” which is specifically derived from a negative stereotype of/attribution to women, even though (as I acknowledged) it is largely used that way. For example, as even Lars noted, it has use in psychology distinct from sexual pleasure. The desire to be tortured and to torture can be, and occasionally are, separate from sexual pleasure.
Imagine a Venn diagram of “bitching” and descriptions of women/supposed feminine attributes. The word “bitching” is completely within the circle of descriptions of women etc. It’s a reference to the supposed (nagging etc) qualities of women.
Imagine the Venn diagram of “sadomasochism” and descriptions of sexual acts/pleasure. The intersection is large but not 100%, some of the circle of “sadomasochism” exists outside that sexual circle. People can be sadists and simultaneously masochists without deriving sexual pleasure. Torturers are one good example (not all of them obviously). Neither does the next circle, of psychological pathologies, overlap completely with the “sadomasochism” circle. One can be sadistic (or masochistic or both) to a degree that is not pathological and still remains not sexual. Again, as I mentioned in my “armchair psychology” (thanks for that Lars!) the “pain”/”suffering” doesn’t have to be extreme or physical or violent, the desire to suffer some form of martydom (ethical, social, personal, whatever) is masochistic, the desire to inflict similar “pain”/”suffering” on others is sadism, the desire to do both is that portmanteau word: sadomasochism. It’s not the same degree or type of thing as sexual sadomasochism, people in dungeons with prisoners and pliers or anything like it.
The sense I took Minnie to be using the word was pretty clear given the context, people deriving pleasure from denying abortion to women, even if they themselves are women or close to women who are harmed in some way by said denial.
Bitching just can’t be used in any way that doesn’t reference femininity, or rather a caricature of it. So the analogy between what I am trying to explain to Lars and what JT to wriggle off the hook is flawed.
If I’m wrong, not only will I admit it and correct myself (wait for JT to do that….don’t hold your breath), but the two words are of markedly different type.
Louis
theophontes (坏蛋):
June 8th, 2012 at 10:27 am
@ PZ
A Turkish friend of mine, at varsity in Holland, had a similarly painful experience with her appendix. She was rushed to hospital and taken to a doctor, expecting to be admitted for an appendectomy. Instead, the doctor decided that she was pregnant.
Friend: “How could I be pregnant?” Doc: “You are pregnant.”
Friend: “I’m not pregnant, I’m in pain!” Doc: “You are …”
Friend: “But I’m a virgin!” Doc: {Pointing to her brother} “Is that your boyfriend?”
By now she couldn’t walk, so her brother commandeered a wheelchair and in panic managed to find a doctor – who conducted an emergency appendectomy.
(I can imagine the doctor muttering as they left: “Fargin furriners, always gettin’ knocked up!!!!elebenty!!!)
back from the clinic. that was largely uninformative so far (though I’m sure y’all will be thrilled to know that I have not been having heart attacks), and given the number of tests, rather expensive. now I’ll have to wait about 2 weeks until the results come in, and something tells me it won’t get less painful in that time
theopontes, one of my sociology professors had a similar experience, except with a heart attack. the guys at the ER insisted that she must be pregnant, and she was insisting that that wasn’t possible. they did the pregnancy test anyway, but when the bill came in she refused to pay for it and won. because how exactly is a woman with a hysterectomy supposed to have gotten pregnant, and why exactly didn’t the doc bother to check her medical history?
illithid:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:10 pm
It took three attempts before he would answer my “and how about black people in Britain” question, and then he didn’t really answer it, so I clarified and asked a fourth time; he still wouldn’t answer.
Hey, it’s Inspector fucking Clouseau come to visit the open thread! Let’s see your magnifying glass, Inspector!
Aw hells, Jadehawk, I’m sorry you have such a long wait. You didn’t get anything for pain relief?
illithid:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:14 pm
Actually, I believe I’m mistaken. You’re more like the Grand Inquisitor, and your magnifying glass is for burning small animals. “Confess! Confess!” No, I won’t confess, you fucking escaped mental patient.
Amphiox:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:15 pm
I still get doctors examining me who wonder where I got the giant war wound.
no. maybe they’re still too worried that it’s heart problems, or maybe they figured the ginormous bottle of pain meds I got when I had my IUD switched out would be sufficient (I’ve been too worried to take them, because they list heart-related side-effects)
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:18 pm
it was the passing in and out of consciousness
Yeah I remember a time when….
oh wait
different kind of story
Amphiox:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:23 pm
though, most of the pain seems to be in the chest & stomach area, not below, so probably not appendix?
No necessarily! The early symptoms of appendicitis are vague and non-localized in the abdomen. Once acute appendicitis sets in, the pain localizes to wherever on the abdominal wall the inflamed tip of the appendix is nearest/touching from the inside. The “classical” RLQ pain is only in the people with the most common anatomy. Some people have longer, stringier appendices, and the tip could end up floating almost anywhere.
I would keep a close eye on these symptoms. If you are examined early, it is not uncommon for appendicitis to be missed, just because the symptoms are so vague in the early phase. If you start noticing the pain moving and starting to localize somewhere, shrinking in area but increasing in intensity, and if that area becomes tender to a light touch of tap with the finger, seek medical attention again immediately.
Even if it is not appendicitis, it could be diverticulitis, which has a similar symptomatic presentation, except its more commonly localized to the left side.
Amphiox:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:25 pm
Illzit, please be quiet.
The grown-ups are talking about something important right now.
Louis:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:33 pm
Sorry to read about the pain Jadehawk. USB painkillers don’t cut it, although LouisCorp does a fine line in {ahem} borderline recreational pharmaceuticals. Expect a black helicopter shortly. It’s okay, we know where you are.
Louis
Lars:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:36 pm
I’m back. Probably not smart of me, but anyway.
When someone starts in with a pretty juvenile (IMO) tu quoque about linguistic usage right after being very politely corrected/informed about the unintended consequences of their demonstrably prejudicial linguistic usage, I am not going out on a limb to bet they are being a {ahem} “less than fulsomely honest interlocutor”. It’s a standard tactic for maintaining their status of “not getting it”. Lars had made a couple of other classic errors as I and others pointed out.
I can understand that my timing was stupid, but I disagree with the accusation of tu quoque.
I’m fully aware that most of us use derogatory terms that we shouldn’t. I have no desire to keep “not getting it”. The reason why I’m “not getting it” is because it will take me some time to think through and digest. I have been a lurker here for some years now, I know that the quality of what Pharyngula’s commenters have to bring to the table is generally high. But I wasn’t prepared for this amount of lack of good faith.
Lars had made a couple of other classic errors as I and others pointed out.
You made some points that I didn’t fully understand, but will read again, and as I said, discuss with a friend of mine. Discussing this with someone I respect in my native language will give me much more than reading explanations on a blog I respect, in English.
Also I’m not sure if your answers really applied all that well to what I said. I started out by saying that if we define everything as ableism, the word loses its meaning. Personality disorders, AFAIU, can be viewed as “normal personality traits” that have gotten out of hand.
Calling someone bordeline is ableism, but calling someone a drama queen/king person isn’t. Is that because the former is a diagnosis and the latter isn’t? If so, my problem with this is that what ought to be a diagnosis and what ought not to, isn’t grounded in anything objective. What’s called ADHD today might a century ago have been called “being a workhorse” or something like that.
I’ve already admitted that I’m not that well versed in this, and I realize now that I probably should have kept my mouth shut in that thread.
2) Kink discrimination:
Not denied, not quibbled with, this unambiguously exists and is not remotely like anything I, or Minnie, said.
How is using kinks as insults not kink discrimination? Sorry but I still can’t wrap my head around that logic.
Sadomasochism is the property of possessing both sadistic and masochistic qualities, it is not itself explicitly a sexual term like “bitching” which is specifically derived from a negative stereotype of/attribution to women, even though (as I acknowledged) it is largely used that way.
When it was coined in 1890, it was about sexuality. If that meaning has changed since then, it’s because people have been using it as an insult.
For example, as even Lars noted, it has use in psychology distinct from sexual pleasure.
I noted that it has its use in psychology, but I never said that use made a distinction from sexual pleasure.
People can be sadists and simultaneously masochists without deriving sexual pleasure. Torturers are one good example (not all of them obviously).
So you think the typical torturer is a sadist? Why do you think he is a sadist, as opposed to, for instance, a psychopath?
(Is me comparing torturers to psychopaths an instance of ableism btw? After all, psychopathy is a diagnosis. And just so you know it, I ask because I don’t know the answer. I suspect it may be yes, but I truly don’t know.)
(And if it is, is calling people psychopaths a worse form of ableism than calling them sadomasochists? I may be going off topic here, so do feel free to ignore whatever you want, but I do wonder, which is the worst insult, and also which is the most ethically defensible of those two insults.)
Again, as I mentioned in my “armchair psychology” (thanks for that Lars!) the “pain”/”suffering” doesn’t have to be extreme or physical or violent, the desire to suffer some form of martydom (ethical, social, personal, whatever) is masochistic, the desire to inflict similar “pain”/”suffering” on others is sadism, the desire to do both is that portmanteau word: sadomasochism.
Sorry, but this is just wrong. In the context of sexuality, sadism is sadomasochism. Masochism is also sadomasochism. The desire to switch between the roles is simply called “switching”. Which is also sadomasochism, btw, but it does not define the term as you seem to say.
The sense I took Minnie to be using the word was pretty clear given the context, people deriving pleasure from denying abortion to women, even if they themselves are women or close to women who are harmed in some way by said denial.
How do you know that those people derives pleasure from it? How do you know they’re not doing it out of fear? Stupidity? Social control (which doesn’t equal pleasure either)? Tradition? Religious notions? Pure misogyny? Etc.
Why pleasure?
The way I did read it, you linked the behavior of the abortion-denyers to a form of sexuality, using the form of sexuality as a derogatory term. Given the context, that seemed pretty clear to me. That was probably not what you meant to do, and I was probably being oversensitive but people seem to like to use the phrase “intent isn’t magic”, I think it applies here.
I can understand why you didn’t take me seriously, though. I mean nobody would seriously defend sadomasochists (those creeps) right? Therefore I had to be trolling. Well, that’s the vibe I was getting, and what made me angry. Maybe it’s just all in my head, but … nah, not all of it. Some of it is out there.
I kinda suspect acute appendicitis doesn’t take several weeks to get to the REALLY bad stage…
The “classical” RLQ pain is only in the people with the most common anatomy. Some people have longer, stringier appendices, and the tip could end up floating almost anywhere.
probably not in that dent between my left shoulder and ribcage, just under the clavicle (that seems to be where the pain has settled for now, in addition to occasional stomach pains, rare random stabbing pains in spots all over my upper torso, and the breathing difficulties)
So you think the typical torturer is a sadist? Why do you think he is a sadist, as opposed to, for instance, a psychopath?
(Is me comparing torturers to psychopaths an instance of ableism btw? After all, psychopathy is a diagnosis. And just so you know it, I ask because I don’t know the answer. I suspect it may be yes, but I truly don’t know.)
It depends on a torturer. For one a psychopath or sociopath who tortures might very well be a sadist, it’s not exclusive. Likewise a perfectly normal person could be a torturer as the Milgrim experiment demonstrated. However, an this is just gut feeling/common sense so likely to be wrong; one would assume someone would not pursue a profession or specialization AS a torturer unless they were either sociopath or sadistic. I would think that doing so would either cause massive stress or a desensitization that would make the person effectively more sadistic or callous.
As to ableism that’s a tricky question especially as the degree to which sociopathcy or psychopathy is either physiological or conditioned behavior is in debate right now.
Lars:
June 8th, 2012 at 1:44 pm
one would assume someone would not pursue a profession or specialization AS a torturer unless they were either sociopath or sadistic.
Personally, I would assume that someone would not pursue a profession or specialization as a torturer unless they were a sociopath, period.
But that’s just biased old me. I still remember when, in my late teens, I realized that sadism and sociopathy were two completely different things that had nothing to do with each other.
That’s when I first realized that not killing myself up to then was not necessarily a moral failure on my part.
Which was quite a relief, to say the least.
I also realized a bunch of other stuff at that time, for instance that sadism wasn’t synonymous with being a callous, egotistical alpha male with no regard for others … oh… well, I may be repeating myself. Anyway, finally being able to look past all the misconceptions, prejudices, and dare I say it again, STIGMA, connected to sadomasochism, allowed me to identify myself as one.
In conjunction with the new-found fact that masochists/submissives actually existed in reality, and not only in my most bizarre dreams, gave me hope that I didn’t have to be forever alone, which previously had seemed the only alternative to kicking the bucket… a relieving period of my life for sure.
But I’m droning on, aren’t I. This is not about the bond between my identity and sadomasochism, but whether or not it’s OK to use the word as an insult.
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 8th, 2012 at 1:46 pm
Lars,
Calling someone bordeline is ableism, but calling someone a drama queen/king person isn’t. Is that because the former is a diagnosis and the latter isn’t? If so, my problem with this is that what ought to be a diagnosis and what ought not to, isn’t grounded in anything objective. What’s called ADHD today might a century ago have been called “being a workhorse” or something like that.
The other day here there was a brief discussion of limp wristed as a homophobic insult, which it is. It’s an interesting case, though, because there’s no obvious reason why it must’ve turned out that way. There’s no a priori logic that could show limp wristed to be an insult about gay men in all possible worlds.
It’s so obviously due to history being contingent.
In fact, if the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics is correct, then there almost certainly exist some Earths on which limp wristed and its cognates were not used refer to gay or “effeminate” men and thus are not homophobic insults.
That’s the objective view. And from that objective view, there is no logical basis for insisting that there ought to be any a priori means of determining what’s a homophobic insult, nor what’s an ableist insult, without observing the patterns of usage on any particular Earth.
Personally, I would assume that someone would not pursue a profession or specialization as a torturer unless they were a sociopath, period
What if they were sadistic?
Is sadist even a firm psychological thing out side of the sexual fetishism? I sort of figured people just had ranges of capacity for taking pleasure from the pain of another.
Some children or adults might torture a trapped animal for the lulz without being sociopathic or labeled a ‘sadist’, but they are definitely engaged in sadistic behavior.
A. R:
June 8th, 2012 at 1:52 pm
{Klaxon sounding, computer voice from Star Trek is coming over the thread-wide intercom}
-A troll has entered the thread, comments 91 and 93. Troll torturing supplies are available in supply locker 47.-
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 8th, 2012 at 2:03 pm
a drama queen/king person
Also, the non-gendered term you are searching for here is drama llama.
You’re better on psyche research, am I missing something?
cm's changeable moniker:
June 8th, 2012 at 2:11 pm
Ogvorbis, apologies! I was over-terse; I meant:
[I'm signing off] Except: [to say that I'm glad it was a minor fire]
not what came across, which was probably:
[Thanks for that,] Except: [I don't care because I'm an idiotic arse]
(And yes, I knew from the announcements that a MOM was in attendance, doing a 3 mile round-trip walk in the dark carrying an extinguisher …)
cm's changeable moniker:
June 8th, 2012 at 2:13 pm
And Owlmirror, thanks! Sanity restored.
Lars:
June 8th, 2012 at 2:15 pm
The other day here there was a brief discussion of limp wristed as a homophobic insult, which it is. It’s an interesting case, though, because there’s no obvious reason why it must’ve turned out that way. There’s no a priori logic that could show limp wristed to be an insult about gay men in all possible worlds.
Are you sure? Women’s elbows are angled differently than men’s, making their hand movements slightly different, maybe that could be described as “more limp-wristed”? (Whether it should, is a different question.)
I once read something about men being effeminate may be caused by prenatal hormone levels. A little more than “normal” of some hormone (testorone?) in a certain week of the pregnancy. The same article said that homosexuality (at least among males) may have similar causes, but this effect happened at a later stage of pregnancy. And that there will be a certain statistical correlation between men being effeminate and being homosexual because of this.
It seems conceivable that being effeminate may cause a man to move more like women, despite his physiology being fully masculine. After all, we’re more than muscles and bone.
These factoids may or may not be sound, I don’t remember where I read this, but at least I was able to google up a Pubmed article that to me seems to indicate that these is at least research going on in topics relating to this. (But I have no idea about the quantity or quality of this research, nor of the article that I read somewhere.)
Anyway, all this may have come up in the discussion you had, and dismissed for good reasons, for all I know.
dianne:
June 8th, 2012 at 2:15 pm
Random bit of advice to Jadehawk: Go to an ER to get your symptoms checked out. They’ll send you a bill. Use it to wipe your butt. They can’t actually repossess your health or refuse to give you treatment in the future. Collection threats for health care costs aren’t entirely a bluff in that they can and sometimes do ruin your credit, but beyond that there’s simply nothing that anyone can do to you. There are laws against turning people in need of medical care away.
Also has your gallbladder been checked out?
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
June 8th, 2012 at 2:16 pm
Also, the non-gendered term you are searching for here is drama llama.
nice
Ogvorbis: Ignorant sycophantic magpie.:
June 8th, 2012 at 2:28 pm
Are you sure? Women’s elbows are angled differently than men’s, making their hand movements slightly different, maybe that could be described as “more limp-wristed”? (Whether it should, is a different question.)
Since I was the one who started that, I might as well jump in and make a fool of myself.
Think about portrayals of gay men in films and on television until quite recently. The stereotypical lisp and the limp wrist were, and for some people, still are, the embodiment of male homosexuality. Your point that women’s and men’s elbows have differences (first I’ve heard that) could provide insight into how this particular stereotype got started. A man, flipping his wrist, appears effeminate and is, by US standards, obviously gay.
Does that make sense?
illithid:
June 8th, 2012 at 2:29 pm
That’s the objective view. And from that objective view, there is no logical basis for insisting that there ought to be any a priori means of determining what’s a homophobic insult, nor what’s an ableist insult, without observing the patterns of usage on any particular Earth.
Nice proof. How does it feel to be the founder of a new branch of mathematics — etiquette theory?
also, how would the ER help? can they get bloodwork done any faster than the clinic…? I already got the ECG and the lung capacity test, and I’m having an x-ray on monday…
I thought it was as simple as Men are muscular and sturdy where women are graceful and flexible. A loose wrist is thus showing a man who is not manly and thus not a real man.
Louis:
June 8th, 2012 at 2:33 pm
Lars,
I can understand why you didn’t take me seriously, though. I mean nobody would seriously defend sadomasochists (those creeps) right? Therefore I had to be trolling. Well, that’s the vibe I was getting, and what made me angry. Maybe it’s just all in my head, but … nah, not all of it. Some of it is out there.
You are so far off base it’s beyond reason. **I** would (and do) defend sexual sadomasochists. Go to it, as I already said.
If you cannot read what I’ve written for even basic comprehension, take a ticket with LILAPWL and Antiochus Epiphanes and fuck yourself with a rubber hose (to use the words of the Immortal Frank Zappa).
“Nuh uh” isn’t an argument, and even though the most common use of “sadomasochism” is in a sexual context (as already admitted, what…twice now?) it is by no means exclusively so, sufficiently not that it is possible to make in context uses of the word without sexual connotations.
Yawn, another tedious fuckwit who simply cannot take being wrong so has to plead some sort of offence to make themselves righteous. You’re as pointless a fuckwit as LILAPWL when the bit’s between his teeth.
Megachurch pastor Creflo Dollar was arrested in suburban Atlanta for an alleged assault on his 15-year-old daughter, police said Friday.
illithid:
June 8th, 2012 at 2:34 pm
I thought it was as simple as Men are muscular and sturdy where women are graceful and flexible. A loose wrist is thus showing a man who is not manly and thus not a real man.
Yes, but if the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics is true, then it’s all up for grabs, you know? Q.E.D.
dianne:
June 8th, 2012 at 2:35 pm
An ER can admit you to the hospital, if you need it. If you don’t, you might be better off at a clinic if they’re actually doing the workup. If they’re not, an ER is a way to route around doctors who are acting as road blocks. Yes, I know that’s horribly inefficient. Sorry.
Gall bladder because of right upper quadrant pain associated with eating. Or did I misread your symptoms?
Is there something in th water of the thread that turns trolls into ubbermornicunintelligabaltrolls?
Lars:
June 8th, 2012 at 2:36 pm
Is sadist even a firm psychological thing out side of the sexual fetishism?
Not that I am aware of (still not being an expert). The only ICD-10 section where I could find any mention of sadism and masochism, deals with “Disorders of sexual preference” (F65).
F65.5 is the subsection dedicated to sadomasochism.
Some children or adults might torture a trapped animal for the lulz without being sociopathic or labeled a ‘sadist’, but they are definitely engaged in sadistic behavior.
I don’t like that definition of “sadistic”, but I have to accept that it’s out there, and that I may be in the minority having anything against it.
OTOH I find absolutely no rational reason to accept using the word “sadomasochistic” about the same scenario. That would be a perversion of the medical term, and the only colloquial use of the word that I know of (apart from using it as a sexual slur) is in the BDSM subculture, where it refers to consensual sexual/emotional interactions between sadist(s) and masochist(s).
We sadomasochists haven’t entirely “lost” the word yet (and actually borrowed it from the medical definition to begin with), so we’re in no position to “take it back”, but I would very much like to continue not losing it.
But that depends on people refraining from using the word as a sexual slur. Let’s see how that goes. :|
Gall bladder because of right upper quadrant pain associated with eating.
oh, I have no pain while eating. I was originally wondering if one can feel hungry instead of being in pain, because I’ve never experienced being this ill and in pain and at the same time being ravenous and not being able to stop feeling hungry
Oh, your gallbladder can fuck everything else up no end. I hope it isn’t your gallbotherer though, as expensive tests™ would be needed prior to…surgery! Having mine out last year helped a great deal, however, I did not cope with the surgery or recovery well at all and, of course, I have good insurance. Without it, I’d be paying off that fucking surgery until the day I died.
also, how would the ER help?
They can do numerous tests at one time, but this includes the expensive tests™.
Lars:
June 8th, 2012 at 2:43 pm
And just when I need that killfile script the most, it dies on me. Fucking typical.
Amphiox:
June 8th, 2012 at 2:43 pm
Jadehawk, the ER can get the bloodwork done immediately, and at least some of the results will be available within a half hour to a couple hours, because the hospital should have its own lab. They can do a chest X-ray and literally have the result within minutes (if you were complaining of pain on breathing I can’t believe that the clinic would do a lung capacity test and not do an X-ray right away).
Irritation of the diaphragm can cause pain referred up into the chest. Both gallbladder or a high riding appendix tip can do this.
Diagnosis over an Internet connection of course should not be trusted, but that is why you need to have a trained professional actually see you.
Louis:
June 8th, 2012 at 2:47 pm
Lars,
And just when I need that killfile script the most, it dies on me. Fucking typical.
If you’re referring to me, please do killfile me. Not dealing with an irredeemable fuckwit like you will be a pleasure. You’ve not paid the slightest attention to any argument I’ve made and can’t deal with the simple fact that you’re wrong. Why do I want to talk to people like you? Oh right….I don’t.
Louis
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 8th, 2012 at 2:59 pm
Ing,
You’re better on psyche research, am I missing something?
There’s a lot more being said here than I can attend to. One thing I noticed:
the degree to which sociopathcy or psychopathy is either physiological or conditioned behavior is in debate right now.
That’s true of pretty much everything in the DSM, though.
There isn’t any serious debate over whether or not there are some genetic factors which increase the likelihood that a person will be diagnosed as a psycho/sociopath.
+++++
Lars,
Are you sure? Women’s elbows [...] nor of the article that I read somewhere.)
What I’m sure of is that you just gave arguments for why limp wristed might be likely to become a homophobic insult on more Earths than you think I implied. All you’re saying is that on this matter, history might be somewhat less contingent than you think I implied.
Nevertheless, even as you imagine it, history is still contingent. There still is no a priori logic that could show limp wristed to be an insult about gay men on every Earth.
On this Earth, we do not yet have standardized homophobic insults which refer to finger lengths. Maybe we will one day, maybe we won’t. At this point in time, there is no a priori way to know whether this will become common parlance. Likewise, even if you were right about everything you said in #114, it would not follow that limp wristed would necessarily become, in common parlance, an insult for gay men on every Earth where the same biology holds.
dianne:
June 8th, 2012 at 3:01 pm
Jadehawk: It might not be gallbladder. That’s just a typical rule out for abdominal/chest pain in a woman and the radiation to the right shoulder is classic. Usually happens about 1-2 hours after eating, rather than immediately after. Could be entirely off, of course.
Amphiox:
June 8th, 2012 at 3:04 pm
When the uninsured go to the ER, both the law and medical professional ethics require that they must be treated. Hospitals can try to chase down payment after the fact but they usually can recover little more than 10%. So they have to eat the cost, which of course they pass along to the people who ARE insured. And since the uninsured don’t get preventive care and usually wait too long before going to the ER, they present with needlessly severe conditions that cost more to treat.
This is one of the reasons why single payer universal access systems spend on average half of what the US spends, per capita, and have better outcomes across the board.
So to all those out there who don’t want to pay for other people’s healthcare, just note that you already are, and you are paying for it in the most inefficient and costly manner imaginable.
Nightjar:
June 8th, 2012 at 3:06 pm
Is there something in th water of the thread that turns trolls into ubbermornicunintelligabaltrolls?
I haven’t been around much lately, but having just finished catching up with both the thread illithid was trolling before and TZT*, I was wondering the same thing.
*Well, sort of. I mostly skimmed and I don’t think anyone can blame me for pretty much skipping shiloh’s comments altogether.
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 8th, 2012 at 3:07 pm
If anyone’s feeling helpful,
Louis needs some help understanding why some women object to being called “darling” by a man who’s not mutually consensually understood to be on diminutive terms with them.
If he can learn that much, then he may be able to learn why, by extension, a gay man may object to the same.
Amphiox:
June 8th, 2012 at 3:10 pm
Illzit, unless you have access to a portal that allows the free flow of people and ideas between multiple universes(still hypothetical), other worlds have no relevance to social conventions on THIS world.
And in case you haven’t noticed, we are dealing with a potential medical emergency here, which you in your blithering way have decided is appropriate to try to derail. I suppose since Jadehawk is a female human being who is not you, you don’t care, do you?
So unless you have that portal and want to introduce it here, shut up.
Better yet, go THROUGH your portal, close it behind you, and don’t come back.
dianne:
June 8th, 2012 at 3:15 pm
So to all those out there who don’t want to pay for other people’s healthcare, just note that you already are, and you are paying for it in the most inefficient and costly manner imaginable.
IIRC, the US spends more _public_ money on health care than any other country. Probably because it insists on this sort of behavior.
Lars:
June 8th, 2012 at 3:18 pm
Likewise, even if you were right about everything you said in #114, it would not follow that limp wristed would necessarily become, in common parlance, an insult for gay men on every Earth where the same biology holds.
True enough. I just wanted to draw some lines between the dots on this here Earth. Probably just me going off-topic anyway, it wouldn’t be the first time.
illithid:
June 8th, 2012 at 3:25 pm
Illzit, unless you have access to a portal that allows the free flow of people and ideas between multiple universes(still hypothetical), other worlds have no relevance to social conventions on THIS world.
Read the thread, shitbag. I wasn’t the one who suggested this, but was making fun of the idea. I’m not the only one posting off-topic, either.
TZT is an open thread, there is no set topic. It is the Troll Pen, so it’s a perfect place for illithid.
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 8th, 2012 at 3:40 pm
I wasn’t the one who suggested this, but was making fun of the idea.
Evidently without understanding it, if you think Amphiox summarized correctly.
There is no claim that “other worlds have relevance to social conventions on THIS world”.
It is simply an exercise that helps us imagine the range of possibilities, of how customs might have turned out differently. It situates us in a vast tree of contingent histories.
Of course, there is no transfer of information between worlds once they diverge. And the thought experiment does not claim otherwise.
illithid:
June 8th, 2012 at 4:12 pm
It is simply an exercise that helps us imagine the range of possibilities, of how customs might have turned out differently. It situates us in a vast tree of contingent histories.
No, not really. You’re confusing two radically different notions of probability. One notion, you’re taking as a possible state any given point in a phase space which is specified by some theory (the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, in your case). For the second notion, you’re taking a much more conventional theory of possibility, i.e. the one that allows Al Gore to have been President of the United States, but not PZ Myers. (This refers to slightly varying initial conditions in some deterministic or approximately deterministic system.) Invoking the Everett theory doesn’t provide us with insight into who could have won the election — or, in this situation, whether homosexuals could have been firm-wristed.
If Everett is correct, then there’s some world where everyone’s going around on pogo sticks. Do you think it likely that the average man in the street would entertain for a second the idea that the pogo stick could have superseded the car as the number one mode of transport? Different notions of possibility, my boy, different notions of possibility.
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 8th, 2012 at 4:14 pm
Lars,
True enough. I just wanted to draw some lines between the dots on this here Earth. Probably just me going off-topic anyway, it wouldn’t be the first time.
S’okay. I’ll try to bring it back around now to how your
problem with this is that what ought to be a diagnosis and what ought not to, isn’t grounded in anything objective.
So the history of psychiatry is contingent too. So what, exactly? For the matter of not-using-psychiatric-terms-as-insults, this is not a problem. Just keep up with the times.
Your example of what if douchebaggery becomes a clinical diagnosis is, as you realize, extremely far-fetched. To give just one reason why it’s very unlikely — psych professionals are already very much concerned with the stigmatization of existing diagnoses. Thus they are not likely to pick a term which is already used as an insult and use it as a diagnostic label.
It’s an amusing hypothetical. But there’s no point in seriously worrying about it. If douchebaggery ends up in the DSM-VI, then okay, I’ll say let’s rethink this approach. For now, it looks like an example of “hard cases make bad law mores”, except this is a non-existent case rather than a hard one.
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 8th, 2012 at 4:28 pm
Hyperon,
If Everett is correct, then there’s some world where everyone’s going around on pogo sticks.
Yes, but — assuming the mediocrity principle — the set of such worlds is probably smaller than the set of worlds where people use automobiles.
Likewise the set of worlds in which PZ Myers became president is probably smaller than the set of worlds where Al Gore did.
illithid:
June 8th, 2012 at 4:33 pm
Posted by Louis in the socail justice thread:
Don’t like it? Great. Tough. Guess what? Who the fuck said I like your use of colloquial language or your style? No one. It’s a tiresome irrelevance leapt on by deluded little inadequates who frankly have fuck all better to do than search high and low for offence. You might as well complain I am being offensive by not believing in your god…oh right, you don’t have one either. Get it yet?
There’s something indescribably hilarious about watching one of the most antagonistic jackals in the pack being devoured by the other jackals.
Cipher, OM, MQ:
June 8th, 2012 at 4:43 pm
But that’s just biased old me. I still remember when, in my late teens, I realized that sadism and sociopathy were two completely different things that had nothing to do with each other.
That’s when I first realized that not killing myself up to then was not necessarily a moral failure on my part.
Which was quite a relief, to say the least.
I also realized a bunch of other stuff at that time, for instance that sadism wasn’t synonymous with being a callous, egotistical alpha male with no regard for others … oh… well, I may be repeating myself. Anyway, finally being able to look past all the misconceptions, prejudices, and dare I say it again, STIGMA, connected to sadomasochism, allowed me to identify myself as one.
In conjunction with the new-found fact that masochists/submissives actually existed in reality, and not only in my most bizarre dreams, gave me hope that I didn’t have to be forever alone, which previously had seemed the only alternative to kicking the bucket… a relieving period of my life for sure.
I’m not supposed to be here at all, and I’ve only skimmed so I’ve missed a lot, but I really wanted to get this in before the subject is forgotten: Thanks for this, Lars. I had similar problems from the other side, and I’ve always suspected that it would be even worse for sadists. (When my #idnr with that information in it goes up, I’ll link to it here.)
Data point: I, too, dislike strongly the fact that sadism and masochism are both used for immoral, harmful, destructive behavior while still being used for sexual preferences, because there is enough silence and ignorance around the issue of kink in at least some circles that the conflation can be destructive to people’s lives.
Unfortunately, as I’ve said elsewhere, I do think it’s a lost battle, but I can’t help how much it makes me cringe and/or grind my teeth when, for instance, antifeminist women are referred to as “masochists” – because I used to be an antifeminist masochist, who feared feminists in part specifically because of a mistaken notion of the feminist view on submissives (derived from contact with sex-negatives), with a Better Than Those Other Girls Chill Girl™ mindset that interlocked with my submissiveness to create seriously fucked up outcomes. Because of that conflation and because of the stigma, I thought that masochism necessarily entailed victimhood and wanting-deep-down/deserving it.
cm's changeable moniker:
June 8th, 2012 at 5:17 pm
Pitbull, many-worlds is wrong. Well, almost completely certainly, wrong.
(It’s not even a good hypothetical.)
If anyone’s feeling helpful, Louis needs some help
Two nations separated by a common language.
English familiarities are deployed much more widely in casual communication than in the US. (I was called “love” by a supermarket checkout person the other day, “alright my lover” is a generic “hello person I know” in the southwest (UK that is, not AZ)).
Do not assume an assumption of intimacy. (We are brits after all, and we don’t do that (shudder).)
It’s best to assume (non-pond-crossing) humour.
For what it’s worth, as an employee of an American company, I get this all the time, just the other way round.
Ichthyic:
June 8th, 2012 at 5:21 pm
There’s something indescribably hilarious about watching one of the most antagonistic jackals in the pack being devoured by the other jackals.
it’s not indescribable.
the word you are looking for, but like so much else, entirely ignorant of, is schadenfreude.
of course, since you’re also ignorant of the social dyanics of this blog, it’s really a false feeling on your part.
glad to see you here.
*gets out bean bag shotgun and cattle prod*
hope you be staying here for the duration?
cm's changeable moniker:
June 8th, 2012 at 5:23 pm
Oh, fuck. When sketching out a post, it’s generally best to hit Preview instead of Submit.
When you get it wrong, you get an insight into my thought processes. (And time to muse on the merits of transactionality WRT the HTTP POST protocol.)
Hope it wasn’t too disillusioning. ;)
cm's changeable moniker:
June 8th, 2012 at 5:25 pm
^When I get it wrong …
*stepping away from the computer*
Ichthyic:
June 8th, 2012 at 5:26 pm
Louis needs some help understanding why some women object to being called “darling” by a man who’s not mutually consensually understood to be on diminutive terms with them.
or maybe you need some help in understanding different countries usage of colloquialisms?
should louis change his sense of sensibilities he grew up with because you grew up with different ones?
what makes you right and him wrong?
only your sense of righteous crusade to change everything to make the world more comfortable for you.
not denying you should, mind you, only natural i suppose, but don’t expect everyone else to agree.
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 8th, 2012 at 5:28 pm
Pitbull, many-worlds is wrong. Well, almost completely certainly, wrong.
I am aware. Hence my care to specify: if/then.
I think it’s usefully illustrative, so I ask:
(It’s not even a good hypothetical.)
Why not?
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 8th, 2012 at 5:45 pm
Louis needs some help understanding why some women object to being called “darling” by a man who’s not mutually consensually understood to be on diminutive terms with them.
or maybe you need some help in understanding different countries usage of colloquialisms?
Nope. I would not knowingly say to a British woman, “you really got your fanny kicked in that argument”. If I said it without thinking, and was told to desist, I would not insist that there was no sexist effect of my words. Intent is not magic.
should louis change his sense of sensibilities he grew up with because you grew up with different ones?
If he is interested in not contributing to homophobia in the USA, (and if there is no sexism involved in a man calling an unfamiliar woman “darling”, which I do not believe to be the case, but which we can pretend for the sake of discussion) then he should use code-switching as appropriate.
We had a well-meaning US-based commenter here recently who used the term “Paki” with total naivity; upon being informed of the term’s racist effect in Britain, said commenter took note and decided not to do it again. That is the rational course for someone who does not want to contribute to racism; if said commenter had not cared about racism, then a rational course would have been to say “okay, I don’t care.”
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 8th, 2012 at 5:46 pm
Guh:
(and if there is no sexism involved in a man calling an unfamiliar woman “darling” in Britain, which I do not believe to be the case, but which we can pretend for the sake of discussion)
Lars:
June 8th, 2012 at 5:47 pm
psych professionals are already very much concerned with the stigmatization of existing diagnoses.
Yes. I know one who says he would like to throw all the pidgeon-holing out of clinical psychology, and use only one diagnose: “Crazy”. And then proceed to treat the patiens as individuals, instead of treating them as diagnoses. That makes sense to me.
(I don’t think he was serious about using the word “crazy”, but if they did, maybe it could help make the word less stigmatizing? Anyway.)
What do you think of the words “psycho” and “psychopath” used colloquially? AFAIU, the colloquial “definition” is much broader than the clinical one, and is often used as an insult.
AFAIU (and I may be wrong), clinical psychopaths are also not very likely to feel hurt about it. Is that relevant?
It seems to me that laypeople often use psychiatric terms for the same reasons that laypeople use terms from physics or biology: One (not very good) reason is to add weight to their words. Another (better?) reason is because the fields of science are really good at defining things. We say tubercolosis instead of consumption, not to add weight to the word, but because it is more accurate.
The problem with ableism is that this can (and often will) hurt the people who are genuinely afflicted with the problem described by whatever term is colloquially used, and stigmatize them.
But is there a better word to use instead of for instance “psycho”, that conveys the same meaning without refering to a psycological condition?
Same with “paranoid”, it colloquially refers to an irrational distrust or fear of people, but also to a host of diagnoses. Is there a good replacement that isn’t an ableism, but still describes the irrational distrust etc.?
I’m still not back on topic. Sorry. Let me collect the threads.
(*re-reading*) Well, OK, maybe I wasn’t entirely off topic either.
The word “depressed” is seldom used as an insult, even if it is a diagnosis. Probably because depression doesn’t generally affect your behavior in a way that may cause you to behave badly towards others. Sociopathy and paranoia, OTOH, may. I would think this a reason why these words are used as insults, because they may arguably be somewhat (if not accurately) descriptive of the negative traits that one wants to highlight in the person one is insulting?
At the same time, a psychriatric diagnosis is stigmatizing in itself. Also when it’s only used clinically. Because it says that There Is Something Wrong With Your Head.
Douchebaggery may not be pathologized in the foreseeable future, but other problematic behavior patterns will (and they will no doubt receive diagnostic labels that are as non-stigmatizing as possible). If I understand you correctly (which I probably don’t but I have already “opened my mouth to remove all doubt” anyway), calling someone on such a negative behavior (in an unfriendly manner) will become ableism the moment the behavior is pathologized.
That seems strange to me. Euphemistic labeling of diagnosis may offset it, but euphemism is just sweeping the dust under the rug anyway, and as far as I understand natural languages, they always manage to shake that dust out from the rug again pretty quickly.
When it comes to mentalisms, I’m just not sure if the bigger problem lies in the colloquial use of diagnostic terms, or in the clinical use of those diagnostic terms in the first place. And I guess that’s what I’ve been using all those words to arrive at. Hm. Apparently I’m not very good at this.
cm's changeable moniker:
June 8th, 2012 at 6:06 pm
(It’s not even a good hypothetical.)
Why not?
Because in some of the many worlds there is a (are many) God(s)?
We have no evidence for the other-worlds (or to be more precise, we have no way of observing them to access that evidence) … therefore Bohr.
Lars:
June 8th, 2012 at 6:11 pm
I had similar problems from the other side
Thanks for reading, and answering. This is not something I talk about often.
Data point: I, too, dislike strongly the fact that sadism and masochism are both used for immoral, harmful, destructive behavior while still being used for sexual preferences, because there is enough silence and ignorance around the issue of kink in at least some circles that the conflation can be destructive to people’s lives.
I guess that’s reason enough to speak up, and take the shit flinging as it comes. For the children, so to speak. After all, they do grow up. Some of them grow up kinky. And some of those grow up suicidal.
Unfortunately, as I’ve said elsewhere, I do think it’s a lost battle
Well I guess I’ll eventually go down either fighting windmills or in self-denial, then. Is there a third option?
for instance, antifeminist women are referred to as “masochists”
Luckily for me, in my country, the same feminists who openly and aggressively equate all (including gay) sadomasochism with sexual abuse of women, are giving feminism a bad name, probably because they equate almost everything with abuse of women.
But their rabidity also kept me from accepting the importance of feminism for many years. As it happens, it was Pharyngula that made me see it.
illithid:
June 8th, 2012 at 6:12 pm
the word you are looking for, but like so much else, entirely ignorant of, is schadenfreude.
No, it’s a very special kind of Schadenfreude. Not just the pleasure of seeing your foe cast down and humiliated, but the joy of seeing the look on his face as he tastes his own medicine! Not to mention the delicious irony of the Witch-hunter General suddenly be accused of sorcery. Priceless.
Lars:
June 8th, 2012 at 6:26 pm
the same feminists who openly and aggressively equate all (including gay) sadomasochism with sexual abuse of women
I phrased that badly. They don’t equate S&M with abuse of women, they say that S&M (including gay S&M) is abuse of women. As I said, rabid. They’ve probably done more damage to feminism in this country than anything else.
cm's changeable moniker:
June 8th, 2012 at 6:42 pm
If he is interested in not contributing to homophobia in the USA, (and if there is no sexism involved in a man calling an unfamiliar woman “darling”, which I do not believe to be the case, but which we can pretend for the sake of discussion) then he should use code-switching as appropriate.
If you are interested in not contributing to American cultural imperialism in the rest of the world (and if [some assumption based on not having gone to the place]) then you should [do something].
Do you see how this works? ;)
Cultural relativism sucks, but it’s how we negotiate the world.
(Aside: it’s hard for me to see how a single comment from a known-sarcastic, known-self-deprecating Brit who uses a known-to-be-used-ironically word on a blog read by a relatively small number of US-anians “contributes to US homophobia”. FSM knows, we hear enough about the discrimination that the country itself provides. And we protest it. But it’s unrealistic to think that an ironic comedic contribution is somehow making it worse, given the population disparity. But I have Brit lenses, so, you know, englighten.)
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 8th, 2012 at 6:49 pm
Lars,
What do you think of the words “psycho” and “psychopath” used colloquially? AFAIU, the colloquial “definition” is much broader than the clinical one, and is often used as an insult.
I don’t know. I haven’t given it much thought because it’s at the far end of what people might potentially be persuaded to change their behavior about. Lost cause, or nearly so. Therefore I’ll be skipping your questions about it.
Same with “paranoid”, it colloquially refers to an irrational distrust or fear of people, but also to a host of diagnoses. Is there a good replacement that isn’t an ableism, but still describes the irrational distrust etc.?
I don’t know, but let’s think about it. I personally don’t figure it’s a problem to say “that’s a paranoid thought” to someone if they are apparently saying something paranoid. Probably everyone has thought something paranoid within the last month, so we know at least what a paranoid thought is. And then the two or more people involved can discuss whether it is actually a paranoid thought, or a justified one. At this level of discussion, I think, it is likely to be not a big deal; the discussion can take place without categorizing any participant as essentially or clinically paranoid.
paranoia, OTOH, may. I would think this a reason why these words are used as insults, because they may arguably be somewhat (if not accurately) descriptive of the negative traits that one wants to highlight in the person one is insulting?
That may be part of why some insults happen, but don’t overlook insults like “retard” which indicate a more general contempt for mental differences. As long as this generalized contempt is known to exist, don’t be too quick to assume there’s self-defense behind any particular mental insult.
If I understand you correctly (which I probably don’t but I have already “opened my mouth to remove all doubt” anyway), calling someone on such a negative behavior (in an unfriendly manner) will become ableism the moment the behavior is pathologized.
I don’t know about all this. I don’t think it’s trivial to determine in the abstract like you’re trying to do here. From the example of paranoia, I think it can be non-stigmatizing to say, in an unfriendly way, “that’s a paranoid notion and you’re an asshole for thinking of others what way.” May or may not be true — but I don’t figure that it’s obviously ableism, since pretty much everybody has some paranoid thoughts.
Consider again how this discussion started. Someone claimed Beale heard voices telling him to have a judge attacked. But it turns out there’s no evidence Beale heard any voices. Ockham’s razor says Beale was just full of shit. If Beale is saying something violent, and we claim it’s because he’s hearing voices, but in fact he’s not hearing voices, then we’ve erroneously taught a stronger correlation between violence and hearing voices, and this error contributes to stigma. Therefore care should be taken to avoid these errors.
If it were true that Beale had heard voices telling him to plan violence against the judge, and Beale’s case was not presented as a cherry-picking expedition — that is, if it was accompanied by accurate statistics about how most people who hear voices do not act violently because of them, and ideally accompanied by individual stories as vivid as the one about Beale — then that wouldn’t be so objectionable.
Whatever you think is so complex about all these abstractions and hypotheticals you bring up, you ought still be able to see this point regarding what really happened.
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 8th, 2012 at 7:05 pm
Because in some of the many worlds there is a (are many) God(s)?
We have no evidence for the other-worlds (or to be more precise, we have no way of observing them to access that evidence) … therefore Bohr.
? None of this pertains to the thought experiments I’m using it for. It’s okay that gods exist in some of those worlds and it’s okay that we can’t observe them.
If you are interested in not contributing to American cultural imperialism in the rest of the world (and if [some assumption based on not having gone to the place]) then you should [do something].
Do you see how this works? ;)
No, I don’t see, because as I said I would accept correction on the use of terminology which is sexist to Britons but not Americans.
But it’s unrealistic to think that an ironic comedic contribution is somehow making it worse, given the population disparity. But I have Brit lenses, so, you know, englighten.
It’s making it worse because I would not have experienced that reminder of my second-class status yesterday, and would not today have to be defending my right to ask people not to unkindly remind me of my second-class status.
Or, you know, every discussion we’ve ever had about “cunt” here.
Go read what Aratina Cage said in the other thread. I’m not interested in enlightening you. Not my job to educate everyone who doesn’t care to self-educate. Just don’t talk to me the way Louis did and I’ll do my best to forget that you’re being an asshole about this.
Amphiox:
June 8th, 2012 at 7:17 pm
Not just the pleasure of seeing your foe cast down and humiliated, but the joy of seeing the look on his face as he tastes his own medicine! Not to mention the delicious irony of the Witch-hunter General suddenly be accused of sorcery. Priceless.
I note that illzit has, again, deliberately ignored the second part of the post it is responding to, in its usual dishonest fashion.
The part that went:
of course, since you’re also ignorant of the social dyanics of this blog, it’s really a false feeling on your part.
This of course is the same illzit who spent so much time on the prior thread wanking about Pharyngula being an echo chamber so unfairly beating on its poor wanking ass.
This is how Pharyngula normally operates.
Louis is not going to get his Molly revoked over this (nor Brownian, Ichthyic, etc), nor LILAPWL (if the rumors I hear about his former identity are true).
And Illzit? That “look on his face” you’re wanking to right now? Unless you happen to be a remote viewer, that’s just your imagination. If the vision remains persistent, you would be well advised to seek medical attention forthwith.
And that you would admit (and proudly) to deriving pleasure from observing this is a fact that tells us a great deal about your character as a human being, or lack thereof.
Not that this is any sort of new revelation about you.
cm's changeable moniker:
June 8th, 2012 at 7:26 pm
illithid:
No, it’s a very special kind of Schadenfreude. Not just the pleasure of seeing your foe cast down and humiliated, but the joy of seeing the look on his face as he tastes his own medicine! Not to mention the delicious irony of the Witch-hunter General suddenly be accused of sorcery. Priceless.
Eh, we’re still discussing. When we’re done, come back and see what we decided, OK?
Hot water, soft toilet paper, and good dentistry
^^ Better More practical you.
Lars:
June 8th, 2012 at 7:47 pm
Consider again how this discussion started. [...] Whatever you think is so complex about all these abstractions and hypotheticals you bring up, you ought still be able to see this point regarding what really happened.
I do.
Still, I’m not quite sure about to what extent I should generally view mentalism as the problem, as opposed to a symptom of an underlying problem.
And by that I do not mean to say that mentalism isn’t problematic. I’m just not sure how much fighting a symptom (provided that mentalism is one) will help in the long run.
OTOH, it’s probably better to fight a symptom that can be fought, than to try fighting an underlying cause that cannot.
cm's changeable moniker:
June 8th, 2012 at 8:00 pm
I’ll do my best to forget that you’re being an asshole about this.
I’m sorry. I’m not trying to be an asshole. I don’t think I’m being an asshole.
But if I am, in whose perception am I being an asshole?
Genuine question.
—
I would accept correction on the use of terminology which is sexist to Britons but not Americans
That wasn’t the point. Because attitudes to work (holidays, sickness, maternal/paternal leave, whatever) in US companies bleed over into non-US countries. Because I had to warn my US boss that what xe wanted to say (but I told xir* not to) would have breached UK employment law.
Because, you know, it’s not just about sexism and/or homophobia.
Hence “cultural”.
*grump*
* And I fricking hate x-pronouns.
—
my second-class status
I will now go on record to say that you have first class status. In this discussion, on this thread, in real life.
But if there are problems in your world (which as I alluded above is different to mine), just don’t blame me for them, thanks.
Not my job to educate everyone who doesn’t care to self-educate.
I have posted several things about micro-inequities. Not my job to explain to you that “everyone” does not include the person you’re talking to.
*raspberry*
John Morales:
June 8th, 2012 at 8:15 pm
Amphiox,
Louis is not going to get his Molly revoked over this (nor Brownian, Ichthyic, etc), nor LILAPWL (if the rumors I hear about his former identity are true).
Fact: ॐ is strange gods before me.
John Morales:
June 8th, 2012 at 8:17 pm
Hey, ॐ, do you like today’s Pharyngula more than in times of yore?
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 8th, 2012 at 8:39 pm
Lars,
Still, I’m not quite sure about to what extent I should generally view mentalism as the problem, as opposed to a symptom of an underlying problem.
And by that I do not mean to say that mentalism isn’t problematic. I’m just not sure how much fighting a symptom (provided that mentalism is one) will help in the long run.
OTOH, it’s probably better to fight a symptom that can be fought, than to try fighting an underlying cause that cannot.
Well, perhaps I share your uncertainty about this, depending on what it is you regard to perhaps be the root cause.
Maybe the cause can be fought. But in any case we should fight the symptoms too because they reduce quality of life.
+++++
Hey, ॐ, do you like today’s Pharyngula more than in times of yore?
John, the most fun I ever had at Pharyngula was arguing with a certain libertarian for a solid year.
We still get to argue, but now we can argue by email, where every participant has a very good model of the other’s understanding, so information is exchanged more efficiently.
So the answer to your question is “no, but I’m okay with that.”
Brownian:
June 8th, 2012 at 8:42 pm
Louis,
You utterly missed my point about it being an innocent affectation which could be just as easily replaced by a billion other perfectly innocent affectations.
I did not.
Use one of those other ones instead then, the ones that don’t have the extra baggage that this one man mentioned has in the context of his experience being a gay man in the US.
Jesus, fuck.
Look perhaps now you’re disappointed in ME. Oh noes, will we ever recover, say we will, my darling….oh fuck now look what I’ve done. Can you take that joke? Or do I have to apologise?
Who are you even talking to here?
I am disagreeing with the universal statement that this is a diminutive term to gay men in all contexts.
Great. Now that you’ve trounced that straw man, can you deal with the context of this one man on this blog who asked you not to use one fucking word to refer to him, and the historical and present reasons for why that word and its implications bother him?
LILAPWL is perfectly entitled to see my use of the phrase that way. He’s not entitled to claim I meant it that way or to chastise me in such a manner as to lead me to believe he is implicitly making that claim (without argument from me), which is what he did.
Oh boy. Okay, I’m really and truly flouncing this time, Inshallah.
But I want to leave you with something to think about.
What you’re insisting upon here is that the onus is on the members of an oppressed class, to make their objections to oppressive language only in terms which the offender will interpret as not calling into question their motives.
(Leaving aside the fact that I clearly attempted to do precisely this — no, wait, let’s not leave that aside, since it provides an example of just how difficult this can be when the offender is exceptionally particular about filing all grievances in triplicate according to proper protocols.)
Be not Louis for a moment, but step behind the veil of ignorance, and think: is that really how you want the world to work?
LILAPWL,
Don’t flounce before this bit! ;-)
About that you’re right. And I fucked up. I absolutely did not mean that the onus is on the oppressed group, and yet it’s exactly what I said. Entirely my bad. I fucked up.
Also this from your linked article:
“Privilege means you can walk away from the conversation whenever you like because the issues being raised aren’t important to you, and you can always imagine that the marginalized people you are walking away from don’t matter”
Is, believe it or not and you have no reason to believe me I realise, a significant motivator in me staying in this conversation. I might be wrong. I don’t think I am, I think I’ve made a very limited case which isn’t being addressed despite repetition and the occasional deviation into acknowledging the errors I’ve made that I’ve noticed so far.
I’ll try to bring more light and less heat from now on. I confess to irritation (did it show?) informing the tenor of more than one response. And I can only apologise for that limitation and annoyance on my part.
As for the rest: the game goes on! (And yes, I know it’s not a game)
pentatomid:
May 30th, 2012 at 6:20 am
Wow, I didn’t know Jesus worked as a clown… Does he do birthday parties?
Louis:
May 30th, 2012 at 6:22 am
Nasty PZ. I need to sleep some time. Coulrophobia…no joke man. Game over, man. Game over!
Maybe that’s why Raj is getting such a shellacking, we’re beating the clown.
Nah, that would mean we’re afraid of him and…wellll…how do I put this nicely? We’re not.
Louis
Louis:
May 30th, 2012 at 6:23 am
Pentatomid,
You should see this cool trick he can do with marbles and his hands. And he’s great at low budget parties where no booze is available.
Louis
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 6:35 am
Keep him away from the kid’s punch bowl and make sure to check the crawl space when the party is over.
DLC:
May 30th, 2012 at 6:42 am
when I was a kid, there was this evil clown that lived down in the storm drains. . . he would come out to steal children . . . Let me see, was his name Cardinal Ratzinger ? or Pennywise?
I forget now. It’s been a long time.
Louis:
May 30th, 2012 at 7:10 am
Rev BDC,
Anyone who says “suffer little children to come unto me” should probably not be at kids’ parties at all. And given what many of his Official Catholic Chappies seem to feel on the matter of kids, I’m not sure he shouldn’t be kept away with a shotgun. Certainly that Muhammed fellow has dodgy ideas about young ladies. And the god thingy is mad keen on impregnating virgins, a paraphilia with deeply misogynistic tendencies.
Hmm, let him in, get him to make the wine, then {cough} “end the party early” pleading a morning appointment for everyone coincidentally.
Kinda like the guy with the best fake ID that people hate because of his personal hygiene problem, but need for the bevvies.
Louis
pentatomid:
May 30th, 2012 at 7:20 am
yep, that’s Jesus alright.
jonmilne:
May 30th, 2012 at 7:21 am
I really hate to be the one that’s going to end up doing the biggest pwnage of Raj yet again – I mean, not to blow my own trumpet, but I was the one who lead him into asking his most stupid question ever on this site, namely “Where did I define God?” – but on the other hand I’m a massive egotist and having a whole bunch of people praise me on ruthlessly I burned him last time has turned out to be a massively alluring factor in tempting me to massively pwn him again:
Raj, with regards to this God that you’ve posited on this site, does it actually make ANY difference whatsoever whether we believe in it or not? Like, for instance, do you think that us non-believers will be doomed to an eternity in hell if we don’t believe, while thinking that believers like yourself will be granted with life in heaven? This is a hook of many of the mainstream religions in order to attract followers, which namely takes the form of what I like to call the “Reward/Punishment Gambit”. Speaking as an ex-Christian, I can testify to the basic effectiveness of this type of marketing from followers of any specific God: “Believe what we say and you will be rewarded with paradise, don’t believe in what we say and you’ll be tortured forever!”
A simple “Yes” or “No” answer will be sufficient here, but either way you lose.
If you don’t believe that there’s any real benefit to believing and drawback to not believing in your God, then there’s even less reason to both believe and worship your God since your God can’t do shit if we don’t do those things. Heck, it will make your God even lamer than the mainstream Gods, and that will be one heck of an achievement.
If however you believe that we will get punished if we don’t believe, then you’ve contradicted yourself again and are therefore subject to another loss. See Raj, it was you who said to us that “it was by God’s own design” that we were supposedly made to be “limited in our understandings about God and how he works”. And yet if you think that your God is capable of rewarding/punishing people for believing/not believing in it, then you’ve added yet another definition to a seemingly “undefinable” God, namely that which can make judgments on humanity. Furthermore, it also makes your God if it exists a complete fucking morally corrupt asshole since it punishes people for not believing in it EVEN THOUGH IT WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR SUPPOSEDLY LIMITING PEOPLE’S MINDS SO THAT THEY WOULDN’T SEE EVIDENCE TO BELIEVE IN IT IN THE FIRST PLACE.
As well as this post, Raj, I’d really appreciate if you also address my previous post to you. Please do not hide behind the fact that my post was long, it was still considerably more educated and informed than the really poor quality responses that you have levelled towards me, even despite the fact that throughout our entire exchanges with you, I’ve probably been absolutely the most civil and patient one here dealing with what you write.
Much thanks,
Jon Milne
Louis:
May 30th, 2012 at 7:24 am
Jon Milne,
Don’t worry about it. It’s nice to have someone take Raj seriously enough to bother with him.
It’s something I do once in a while, as do many here. Very effective. But you can’t expect one person to do all the heavy lifting, hence why we spread the jobs out. I think Chigau has to take the next abject muppet seriously! ;-)
Louis
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
May 30th, 2012 at 7:26 am
jonmilne:
We’ve secretly replaced YHWH with Raj’s patented formula God Lite. Let’s see if anyone notices!
jonmilne:
May 30th, 2012 at 7:27 am
Reproducing my previous post that Raj didn’t answer:
You defined him as something that couldn’t be defined, and where as a result minds trying to define him are limited in how they can do so. But that’s STILL A DEFINITION. If you TRULY couldn’t define God for us, you’d simply say “I don’t know” and admit you’re either ignorant or being simply disingenuous on the subject. Either way, you’ve self-contradicted yourself.
The bolded parts answer your question by what I mean. What purpose does it serve for “God” to make it so that it’s creation can’t understand exactly what it is? When crafting a supposedly “intelligently designed” world, what benefit exactly would it serve to God to have its created people not comprehend it, and what benefit would it serve to the people to be ignorant of the meaning of the supposedly existent God to which you posit?
My question was: What is the practicality of “limiting our minds” so that we “cannot understand God”? Nonetheless, even if one buys into the notion that your paragraph just there – rather than amounting to more obfuscation – is even remotely considerable as an actual answer to my question, we still have the problem that you’ve just self-contradicted yourself AGAIN.
On the one hand, you claim our minds are so limited that we can’t comprehend God, and yet nonetheless this is a God that you claim to worship. Which means that if that’s truly the case, then despite the fact you have a human mind and therefore have all the “limitations” you talked about, you regardless still seem to UNDERSTAND and COMPREHEND your God of choice enough to WORSHIP it. But by your own logic, that’s simply not possible. There’s close to zero sense in worshipping any of the Gods that have been given certain definitions of characteristics by some of the more main-stream religious cults. There’s ABSOLUTE ZERO sense in worshipping something that you yourself claim that you as a human absolutely do not understand.
You add an addendum to your point on colour, namely about I how apparently I should not present you with any stuff on the science behind colour perception and the colour spectrum.
What you’re pulling here is similar to something Ray Comfort did in his interview on the Atheist Experience, wherein Ray asked the AE hosts to give him evidence on evolution. I will display the link later on in my post, but what was particularly revealing about the exchange was that the hosts gave Ray some damn good evidence (namely to do with how the development of vaccines are aided, the great deal of transitional fossils, the DNA evidence, the observation of speciation in the lab including flies and bacteria) and Ray rejects all the evidence the hosts present based on his presuppositions despite it being perfectly valid.
That’s what you’re doing here by rejecting the scientific explanations of how colour spectrums and perceptions actually work. They don’t fit with your world-view, so you disregard them, despite having nothing remotely decent resembling evidence to offer as an alternative explanation.
As for what you say about the Big Bang, again I have to invoke the Ray Comfort/AE interview, namely the part where Ray asks the AE hosts “tell me what was in the beginning without saying I don’t know”. As RationalWiki points out: (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/User:Feredir28/The_Atheist_Experience_debates_Ray_Comfort)
Without evidence, and proper application of the Scientific Process, you cannot just claim that your version of events is the truth. I’m sure I’m not the first person to say this to you, and I almost certainly won’t be the last, but the burden of proof is on YOU.
Sorry buddy, but to paraphrase a great mind, Richard Lenski when he was confronting Conservapedians on their similar level of ignorance and obfuscating and intellectual dishonesty that you’re displaying (especially since you disregarded the entire first half of my last post where I rip Scwartz to shreds):
“I offer this lengthy reply because we are educators as well as scientists. It is my sincere hope that some readers might learn something from this exchange, even if you do not.”
FossilFishy (Lobed-finned Killer of Threads):
May 30th, 2012 at 7:29 am
When my daughter was three she went through a period where she refused to go to sleep unless her mother was present. We tried lots of tactics but nothing worked and it was getting worse and worse. In the end we decided to go with a modified “cry it out” strategy.
In the straight up method you simply put the child to bed, shut the door and leave them there until they cry themselves to sleep. That seemed cruel and also felt like it had the implied message of “we won’t always be there for you”. So we put her to bed, told her we loved her and that she had to stay in bed, left and shut the door. I waited in the hall until I heard her get out of bed. I then came back in, picked her up, put her back in bed, tucked her in, told her I loved her and that she had to stay in bed. This seemed to us to have the right message: bed time is non-negotiable, we’re doing this because we love you and we will always be there for you, especially when you are being naughty. :)
Through the course of this my emotions ran the gamut. First I was nervous and apprehensive about how it would go. Then I became quite upset at the obvious distress my daughter was exhibiting. And as time passed, the count of how many times she got out of bed climbed from ten to twenty to forty to eighty and with that mounting number my mood swung round. I grew more and more admiring of the tenacity of my intelligent, beautiful, wilful little girl. I began to barrack for her. “Come on, one more time, don’t let a meany like me win.” I whispered to myself after putting her back yet again. I lost count somewhere in the nineties and she eventually didn’t so much give up, as run out of energy to continue. My back and arms ached for a couple of days after: The Toddler Workout ™, coming soon to a bankrupt Zumba franchise near you.
Perhaps this is why I have a soft spot for Raj. I mean yes, his light bending density has time and again made me truly laugh out loud and I do enjoy the self-esteem boost that that gives me. But I also admire unblinking tenacity, misguided though it might be. YMMV of course.
Oh the other hand I just realised that my three year old is also smarter than Raj. She knew when she was beat. The next night only took a dozen or so repeats to get her to stay in bed, and the following night just a couple, and we haven’t had a problem since.
So there you go Raj, increasing my self esteem once again, only this time by the second hand glory in being the father of a three year old who’s smarter than a purported adult. Please I beg of you, don’t flounce for real, you’re the gift that just keeps on giving.
John Morales:
May 30th, 2012 at 7:32 am
FossilFishy, lucky daughter, you have!
(I’m serious)
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
May 30th, 2012 at 7:34 am
jonmilne:
I used to do that, too — attempt intellectual engagement with the clowns. I’m glad you’re taking that role here. While I hope you have better experiences than I, there is a good chance you’ll find what I found: folks like Raj don’t want the truth. They don’t want debate. They don’t want to explore their own ideas, however interesting or mundane.
They want to pontificate. They want to proselytize. They want you to tell them their thoughts are brilliant and original and insightful, and you are enlightened.
But I suspect you already know that, and are sincere in spite of Raj’s patent willful ignorance. In which case, you are a far more patient person than I.
FossilFishy (Lobed-finned Killer of Threads):
May 30th, 2012 at 7:37 am
Thank you John.
Hurinomyces bruxellensis:
May 30th, 2012 at 7:58 am
Pentatomid
And to think the catholic church has been faithfully reproducing the last supper all these years, and callously omitting the colorful balloon animals that followed!
antigodless:
May 30th, 2012 at 8:09 am
Right back at you, Sunshine.
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 8:11 am
Awwwwww someone’s feelings are hurt because people are making jokes about their make believe friend.
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
May 30th, 2012 at 8:14 am
antigodless:
Your thoughts are brilliant and original and insightful, and I am enlightened.
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 8:16 am
Good grief. That’s all you’ve got?
The Zombie Jesus thing is a joke. A play on a myth.
Your video attempts to make a point but….
where is it?
FossilFishy (Lobed-finned Killer of Threads):
May 30th, 2012 at 8:28 am
Weee, that rebuttal was so weak antigodless that EPO, synthetic growth hormone and a killer exoskeleton wouldn’t be enough to get up and walking. Much like your non-existent zombie BFF I might add.
Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:
May 30th, 2012 at 8:51 am
Sorry AntiIMAGINARYDEITYless, until you provide conclusive physical evidence for your imaginary deity, it remains imaginary. Evidence that will pass muster with scientists, magicians, and professional debunkers, as being of divine, and not natural (scientifically explained), origin. Same for your babble, a book of mythology/fiction you claim is inerrant. And what have you presented so far? Your unevidenced OPINION, which *POOF* is dismissed as bullshit, and makes your deity and babble bullshit…Welcome to science, where evidence, not YOUR OPINION, rules…
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
May 30th, 2012 at 8:51 am
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
The video was very much a play on a myth. Those were, after all, mythical misrepresentations of atheism and atheists.
The major distinction is, we don’t believe the myth we’re lampooning. I suspect antigodless is jejune enough to believe not only the myth of the resurrected Christ, but also the myth of the evil atheist.
pentatomid:
May 30th, 2012 at 8:53 am
Hurinomyces bruxellensis,
Might I ask where you’re nym comes from? I’ve been wondering about it.
pentatomid:
May 30th, 2012 at 8:54 am
ahem, ‘your’ not ‘you’re’. Woops.
Anri:
May 30th, 2012 at 8:54 am
I will admit to being weak and therefore unwilling to watch the video, despite the clear state-of-the-art animation and screenwriting it so clearly embodies.
If someone who has bothered to do so could clue in the less brave of us – are there any points made in the (no doubt) in-depth analysis of faith versus godlessness other than “Hur hur, atheists R dumb and I can give them dumb names,” by chance?
Because if there’s more to it than that, I’ll gird up all my various loins and watch the thing, as the last chewtoy I was working on appears to have long since scarpered.
Even better, antigodless could personally summarize the arguments presented in their (I presume) deeply insightful video. That would be helpful.
Thanks!
pentatomid:
May 30th, 2012 at 8:57 am
Why, Nigel,… Are you sayng that we atheists aren’t evil!?! But I just renovated the old secret volcano base. Fitted a new doomsday device and everything. I was going to have a baby barbecue and all too. Goddamn.
Hurinomyces bruxellensis:
May 30th, 2012 at 8:59 am
antigodless, a sincere thank you for the amusing video. My absolute favorite part occurs at about 1:05 when a banner says “watch as these bumbling little atheists attempt to make a cogent argument”, and then none of them actually make any arguments.
This is a video with a wonderful message, namely that theists can appropriate our “fairytale” line and use it to call us names, but they cannot address our ideas. Have fun with that sunshine. Let me know if you come up with any colorful ones the next time you are seething about how your rhetoric doesn’t make any sense.
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 9:09 am
you have a point
Hurinomyces bruxellensis:
May 30th, 2012 at 9:11 am
pentatomid
Brettanomyces bruxellensis, which is one of the species of wild yeast commonly found in Belgian lambic ales and saisons. The species name is derived from the latinate spelling of Brussels.
Hurin is my stable nym. You can call me Hurin for short if you like.
FossilFishy (Lobed-finned Killer of Threads):
May 30th, 2012 at 9:13 am
Perhaps that video is an example of the same cognitive collapse that happens to musicians when they find Jesus and lose their talent. I’m sure that prior to the videographer being washed in the blood of JEEBUS they were creating things like this.
pentatomid:
May 30th, 2012 at 9:15 am
Hurinomyces,
Ah, I see. A fellow fan of Belgian beer. The ‘Brussels’ bit I got already (I’m Belgian myself so that was part of why I asked).
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 9:17 am
we want the funk
Louis:
May 30th, 2012 at 9:27 am
I once heard a tale, probably apocryphal, that a Belgian lambic beer brewery was required by EU Health and Safety regs to remove all its old Nth century tiles from the pipes/ducts down which the heavenly brew used to flow.
They did so, putting in New, Clean and Shiny tiles™. As required.
And they no longer got lambic beer out of the other end. It turned out that the bacteria in the old tiles were what made the beer lambic beer.
For those not in the know lambic beer ages like wine ages. Normal, non-lambic beer doesn’t.
Louis
chigau (違う):
May 30th, 2012 at 9:30 am
Louis
I’m supposed to do what to which muppet?
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 9:33 am
Not necessarily true. Many higher alcohol beers will age just fine. Imperial stouts for example do well.
Louis:
May 30th, 2012 at 9:40 am
Rev BDC,
Well I learned something today. And about beer too. I didn’t think that was even possible! :-)
Louis
pentatomid:
May 30th, 2012 at 9:41 am
Rev. BDC,
There’s a difference between ‘aging just fine’ and aging like a lambic ale (which is a thing of pure beauty).
Seriously, though, you’re quite correct in that lambics aren’t the only beers that age. Though it is rather exceptional.
I think what Louis was referring to is that lambic ales, unlike other beers, are fermented spontaneously, like wines. in other words, it is fermented through exposure to wild yeast strains present in the air and the building of the brewery. Other beers are fermented by the addition of cultivated yeast strains. As a result, the properties of a lambic ale is much more dependent on the environment than other beers.
Louis:
May 30th, 2012 at 9:41 am
Chigau,
It’s your turn to take the next clueless troll here seriously. You have to be nice to them for an above average number of posts, take their “arguments” apart in detail and generally treat them like special snowflakes. Rather like Jon Milne is doing to Raj.
Don’t object, your name came up on the rota. See?
{Shows Chigau the rota}
Louis
KG:
May 30th, 2012 at 9:46 am
An, antigodless-but-brainless couldn’t stick the flounce!
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 9:48 am
Oh I’m well aware of Lambics (Had a bottle from Brasserie Cantillon Brouwerij a friend had been saving not too long ago) and how they are made I was just correcting the idea that only Lambics age well.
And wines are not typically fermented through wild yeast strains. They use cultivated yeast as well.
chigau (違う):
May 30th, 2012 at 9:48 am
(Looks at rota.)
OK.
(Rolls up sleeves.)
Where’s it to, then?
pentatomid:
May 30th, 2012 at 9:53 am
Oh, you are of course quite right. That was a stupid mistake on my part. Although wines could quite easily be made through spontaneous fermentation. I guess using cultivated yeasts just adds a level of control to achieve a desired end-result. I don’t know all that much when it comes to wine making. More of a beer person myself.
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 9:57 am
Yep there are even people with beer cellars.
In fact there are a lot of people with beer “cellars” for aging beer, me included.
If you consider a specific temp controlled fridge a cellar.
I have a number of bottles I’ve been aging for a few years and a bunch from the last couple.
Typically anything above 8% will age though there are some lower ABV styles that age well too. This is thrown out the window with super hoppy IPAs. They lose their flavor rapidly after being brewed due mainly to the hop volatility. Drink your big ass IPAs fresh.
Lambics of course, Barley Wines, Stouts, Belgian strong ales, Triples, Quads, some porters, other Bretty ales, sours, Berliner weisse, some Saisons, and a number of other styles etc..
If I think a beer will age well (and I can afford it) I’ll buy two (or more) of each. One to drink and one to age.
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:03 am
Yeah totally. I’ve had lambics that completely change their character from year 1 to year 2 because of the nature of the wild yeast. Sometimes with amazing results, occasionally not so much.
There are a lot of cool brewers doing crazy funky things with wild yeast. Allagash has a line of coolship beers in this exact vein. Had a few of them and they are fantastic.
Others are the The Bruery, Russian River, Lost Abbey, New Belgium and many others.
It’s a great time to be a beer lover.
I’m a big fan of Sour and Funky beers.
RahXephon, Bouncer of the De Facto Feminist Club:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:04 am
I watched IT as a kid, which was a bad idea, so thanks for the murderous clown flashbacks, PZ.
As far as TZT, I thought this was where trolls were quarantined? This all seems far too genteel! Where are the insults? The fiery recriminations? The porcupines?
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:07 am
pentatomid:
Not at all. Just not in the simple, trivial evil ways portrayed by the Seven Atheists in the video. People who do not understand the evil of atheism simply don’t understand how sophisticated the evil of atheism is.
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:08 am
Sorry that was very USA centric on the brewery list. Was not intended.
pentatomid:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:11 am
I was thinking of doing that. I currently don’t have the space for it, though. Although come to think of it… Plenty of space at my parents’house… Hmmm.
And yeah, I’m a fan of sour beers too.
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:13 am
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
A-fuckin’-men.
Beer is proof that yeast exists, and loves us.
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:15 am
Yeah my problem is that I live in Charleston SC.
What this means is
1. No basement or cellar due to extreme proximity to the ocean. Those things tend to flood very easy around here.
2. 95-105 degree heat throughout the summer meaning a garage will not work.
So I had to commandeer a second refrigerator and through my masculine guile and exerting my Man of the house power (ie.. begging) I was allowed to use it as my beer fridge / cellar.
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:15 am
so fucking stealing this
FossilFishy (Lobed-finned Killer of Threads):
May 30th, 2012 at 10:15 am
RahXephon
Well, we can’t have that! What to do, what to do….ah yes!
I enjoy the occasional VB (The much reviled mass produced Victoria Bitter).
pentatomid:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:16 am
Thank goodness for that. Now I can continue my evil ways without worries… Now where did I put that death ray…
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:19 am
Next “project” is another fridge for curing meat….
pentatomid:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:20 am
Yeah, well, little troll action for the moment. Just grab a pint with us.
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:20 am
pentatomid:
Uhm, I’m embarrassed to say it’s still in my garage from when I borrowed it from you two months ago. I mean, your volcanic base wasn’t finished yet, and there was this troll infestation and all.
You can have it back now, I reckon.
myeck waters:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:21 am
Is there any entertainment value in the video antigoodness posted? I’m speaking as someone who has watched War of the Gargantuas in its entirety.
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:26 am
no
pentatomid:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:26 am
Rev. BDC
I don’t even have the space for that, living in a tiny student flat as I do.
Myeck waters,
War of the gargantuas? I vaguely remember that movie…Wasn’t that originally intended as a sequal to ‘Frankenstein conquers the world’?
pentatomid:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:28 am
‘Sequel’ not ‘sequal’. Hail Tpyos.
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:31 am
myeck waters:
Not really. It takes its own stereotypes too seriously. It’s essentially an extended “atheists are poopyheads.” SEE the amazing equation of atheism and faith! HEAR such great arguments for a god like, “My god really does exist!” BE ASTOUNDED by the lack of actual humor!
It’s pretty bad. And I’m speaking as someone who has watched Battlefield Earth in its entirety.
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:34 am
good grief man
pentatomid:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:36 am
You saw Battlefield Earth in its entirety? You’re that person?
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:38 am
Rev. BigDumpChimp:
Yeah. That took a lot of beer. And Rifftrax.
pentatomid:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:40 am
nigel,
You still had the deathray? Oh okay, I was starting to think I threw it away by accident… You haven’t seen my Giant Millipede of Doom by any chance, have you. I’m pretty sure I parked it next to the Infernal Aquarium of Certain Death, but it appears to have gone missing.
Louis:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:42 am
Rev BDC,
Is it wrong that I love you? If it helps, it’s a very shallow love…about the depth of a beer cellar! ;-)
You’re a man who takes his booze seriously, I respect that.
Louis
Audley Darkheart (liar and scoundrel):
May 30th, 2012 at 10:43 am
(Haven’t checked the front page in a while.)
Fucking hell, PZ! Couldn’t you find something a little less nightmare inducing?
ryanwilkinson:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:50 am
Anyone in England?
https://www.facebook.com/events/276479119101858/
This looks fun!!
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:50 am
Don’t get me started on whisk(e)y I might nerdgasm all over my office.
That would be hard to explain away.
The worst (or best) thing my doctor has done to me over the last few years was to give me a status report on the health of my liver as amazing and in fantastic shape.
I’m always up to a challenge.
Brownian:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:50 am
Yes, you are a terrible person, rajkumar.
Louis:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:57 am
Rev BDC, #70,
I received a similar challenge recently. I view it as an insult to my masculinity and shall be correcting with Jagermeister and self loathing this weekend.
Louis
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:01 am
Yes I’m on my way to the Asheville “Beer City” festival this weekend. I’m testing the hypothesis that I can float my way back to Charleston Sunday riding on my liver.
Emptyell:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:04 am
myeck waters
Just in the meta sense of imagining the perspicacity level of anyone who could find it even remotely amusing or insightful. The pace is quite slow to make sure you don’t miss it’s utter lack of anything interesting.
If antigodless is all that’s left around here, and that’s the best ze can do, someone should go spelunking the fundie webs and do some recruiting. You can point out the great service they would be doing by bringing the good news to the benighted heathens. Truly a missionary calling.
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:09 am
Emptyell:
A kind of trolling for trolls. Interesting suggestion.
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:12 am
My liver has sued for emancipation.
That’s better than the restraining order I got from it last year.
Ogvorbis:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:18 am
Thank you for the beertalk. I enjoy. (Especially Belgian lambics).
Last week, I tried to describe Ommegang Three Philosophers to a man who drinks Coors Light.
Not sure why I tried. Apparently the idea of drinking beer for the taste is foreign to some.
theophontes 777:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:20 am
@ Hurinomyces bruxellensis
I have noticed the same thing on the xtian sites I have been banned from. They are adopting our mannerisms but failing to take on our ideas.
(They have taken their mannerism to a high level of affectation. If you are bored, it is well worth prodding around on such sites and watching what crawls out of the woodwork. It is très drôle.)
@ nigel
All bow down before Almighty Phoenicia (PBUH)
@ pentatomid
My student diet revolved around Geuze, mosselen and haring. Omnomnom….
myeck waters:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:22 am
Battlefield Earth? Damn, I’m such an amateur.
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:32 am
Walton,
I agree. And maybe it should feel unjust. Maybe that’s best. Maybe people will be a little less cruel when they know the person being punished can’t actually deserve it.
If you haven’t checked out Smilansky on the shallowness of compatibilism, by the way, I think you’ll appreciate the heck out of it.
Comfortable still isn’t the right word. Aquiescing, maybe.
Yeah but don’t frame this as though it’s particularly a problem with utilitarianism. As you noted, it’s a problem with every justice system ever. And the alternative is to say to murderers “please don’t do that again” and then let them go.
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:33 am
myeck waters:
Just don’t try this without building up your resistance first. Start with something relatively tame, like Deep Blue Sea or Reign of Fire (depending on your current level of resistance). Build up slowly until you can handle the third Spiderman movie. After that, I’d highly recommend a solid week of the original Battlestar Galactica or Buck Rogers (the 1980s version). You could also try the second season of Space: 1999.
After that, you are most likely ready for Battlefield: Earth.
Just don’t watch the video antigodless posted. Leave that one to the professionals.
theophontes 777:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:36 am
Oi ॐ! You xposted…. (But grab a beer now that you are here anyway.)
pentatomid:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:45 am
Ogvorbis,
Indeed. It’s sad really, since there is such a diversity of beautiful beers out there.
theophontes777,
Pretty close to my current diet: mosselen, frieten (French fries*) and a wide variety of Belgian beers (including Geuze, obviously).
*which are totally belgian, not french.
pentatomid:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:47 am
Uhm… Feeling a bit embarassed now… I actually liked Reign of Fire
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:52 am
*quietly sneaks off to look up mosselen
AHHH mussels!
bigbear:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:54 am
Crossposting for topicality:
ॐ :
No it wouldn’t, precisely because,
I was trying to imply that when I said I understood its appeal. That consequentialism is, like you said, almost tautological as a foundational system for ethical action, since it is more rigorous and robust and empirico-rational than deontological or other systems. Though I admit I didn’t explicitly elaborate this, and left it as an unsaid assumption that only systems of thought that passed muster in this way are what I had in mind when I said “appealing”.
I have to read around a little more about the Knobe effect and evolution-of-intentions-as-heuristics hypothesis before I can say anything intelligent about them.
Anyway,
This is what vexes me about utilitarian evaluations. Sure, far as consequences are concerned, it makes not a smidgen of difference. But if “punishments” are going to be utilitarian in character, you would need to do almost virtually impossible ethical computations, in many cases if not all, while meting it out to actors who can not be innocent, due to their lack of intentionality. How fair would that be to the actor, even if it meant a world of good? How do you make that choice?
I am probably rehashing the same point, and you’d be perfectly in your right to “so what? thats how it is and if everyone saw that, they’d get with it and these vexations would fade away” me.
But I’m not so confident in our ability to run these sorts of ethical calculuses to rank utilitarianism above other systems, which are more sympathetic to these concerns and which do not require us to make impossible evaluations.
No, not if rules are set up based not only on consequential considerations but also encompass justice and fairness. In fact this is what sets rule consequentialism apart from other utilitarianisms.
And if its demonstrated that there are serious flaws in rule consequentialism, well there’s always pragmatic ethics.*shrugs*
We don’t have to be beholden to ethical systems that don’t pan out in the real world or systems that cause serious infractions on our moral intuitions which can’t be redressed by rational analyses.
theophontes 777:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:57 am
@ pentatomid
Don’t tell cicely, but the frieten are fried in .
@ life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ
You really do get around: Linky to the part in upthread linky where ॐ makes a cameo appearance…
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
May 30th, 2012 at 12:01 pm
pentatomid:
I totally enjoy Reign of Fire. It’s just that it’s not a very good movie, as far as most criteria for “good movies” go. The dialog is generally sub-par, the action is often illogical, and the resolution was completely contrived. I really enjoy it, in spite of those flaws.
My wife is the same way about Deep Blue Sea. That’s her Bad Movie Night movie — y’know, when the day has been so terrible, the only solution is chili cheese dogs with Fritos, and a bad movie.
theophontes 777:
May 30th, 2012 at 12:01 pm
@ bigbear
Sneaking a cross-post in here doesn’t necessarily mean you’ll get a free beer!
bigbear:
May 30th, 2012 at 12:05 pm
@ theophontes 777 :
Heh, I’m always prepared for such hijinks, so I bring my own.
*Pops can and swigs*
myeck waters:
May 30th, 2012 at 12:13 pm
I haven’t seen it in years but I loved Space: 1999 when it was in its first run. It was like someone had taken the worst element from the weakest episodes of Star Trek TOS and put them in a blender. Plus I was a huge fan of the Andersons’ crappy model work going way back.
The original Galactica, on the other hand, I never could take. Ugh. We were all excited when it premiered, and a local pizza parlor advertised that the were showing it on their giant screen TV, so we went – and the sheer awfulness of it drove us back out of the place.
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 12:23 pm
Krull
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
May 30th, 2012 at 12:26 pm
Ah. I see your point.
I think this is a feature, not a bug. In deontology, arriving at the best rules is at least equivalently difficult (or in fact impossible), but these computations take place in an abstracted debate among elites, with the result that a set of rules comes “pre-packaged” for the punisher, who can simply do as instructed and then feel fair for carrying out the dictates of a procedural justice.
Utilitarianism confronts the punisher with the real difficulty instead of abstracting it away, and so may foster less self-righteousness and seemingly-justified gratuitous cruelty.
There’s no better option, though. Any intentionality is ultimately caused by the initial conditions of the universe and subsequent random quantum effects. Everyone is ultimately innocent, because they couldn’t choose to choose otherwise, and yet we are apparently left with the necessity of punishing some, at least if we are going to have a civilization.
Saying “we are going to punish you even though you are incapable of deserving it” is at least honest.
Caring about intent produces injustices, though. If it results in harsher legal penalties for people with malicious intent, then we’re treating those people harshly for something they could not have chosen otherwise. Intent can only ultimately matter in a world with contra-causal free will, which of course can’t exist.
What can justice and fairness possibly mean if they don’t refer to just and fair outcomes?
Weed Monkey:
May 30th, 2012 at 12:35 pm
Ooh, the hell with that! For some reason I thought it might be interesting because I heard it mentioned as some kind of a cult favourite, but I couldn’t stand 20 minutes of it. It started awful and got steadily worse. And not awful in the way some movies are so bad they’re good.
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 12:38 pm
Yeah it’s easily one of the worst movies I’ve ever seen. But if for some sadistic reason the programming director at whatever buried in the dial cable channel I happen to be flipping by has it on, I find myself drawn to it.
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
May 30th, 2012 at 12:43 pm
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
You win.
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
May 30th, 2012 at 12:49 pm
:) That shrug is most appropriate! Pragmatic ethics have much to recommend them, and my thinking has been informed by Rorty, that’s why I was recently reading this, which I linked to this back in the Bruggencate/Hovind thread, around #102.
Pragmatism is great for its anti-foundationalism. The only problem is it doesn’t offer much in the way of determining “what is good”. Rorty didn’t think “what is good” is even a coherent question, except that it refers to whatever democratic debate arrives at — essentially it’s “democratic commant theory” as opposed to “divine command theory”.
That’s a refreshingly honest approach, but I’m not persuaded that something can be good just because people discussed it and decided it was good. I think we have a tendency to get those questions wrong. By taking the positively-valenced affects as the good, at least we can know what the democratic debate should be aiming for and why.
(But yeah, I’ve borrowed the descriptiveness of pragmatism for my aforementioned descriptive utilitarianism. I just think they neglected to note that there is a neurological answer to “what is good”.)
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
May 30th, 2012 at 12:53 pm
er, “democratic command theory”
Weed Monkey:
May 30th, 2012 at 1:13 pm
Maybe Relic Hunter-awful: bad acting, ridiculous script, and not even a hint of irony.
bigbear:
May 30th, 2012 at 1:56 pm
ॐ :
I see what you’re getting at here and I concede you’re right about deontological rule making.
Less importantly, I think you’re a little off-keel to think deontological ethical debates have to be in the domain of elites any more or any less than those of any other system. It seems that way, but it isn’t really, atleast it doesn’t have to be, to qualify as deontological. We could be equally honest and describe in great detail to any interlocutors on why the rules were chosen.Or you could always publish regular despatches to the laity to keep them in the loop on the latest in Metaethics;I can see how that would catch on :)
Also more importantly, you’re addressing purely deontological systems here and not hybrids with consequentialism.
Hmmm, this I had not considered. But I don’t see why knowing there’s no contra-causal free will can’t still inform our attitudes towards intentional transgressors in a non-consequentialist system as well, while simultaenuously avoiding injustices to accidental transgressors. Am I missing something here?
Ah I see how by making it descriptive you’re trying to avoid some of the notoriously intractable problems with utilitarianism. But this is a little circular, no? A purely consequentialist system defines what a just a fair outcome is very differently from all other non-purely consequentialist systems. So which metric of fairness and justice do we use?
For instance, there’re many famous hypotheticals in the literature, where impossible choices between the interests of a few and interests of a multitude have to be made which illustrate problems with utilitarian calculations that don’t consider fairness and justice in the conventional sense, which isn’t – note, a purely utilitarian calculation of the greatest good for the greatest number.
I’ve yet to
readskim that link, thanks :)LOL
Hurinomyces bruxellensis:
May 30th, 2012 at 1:57 pm
RBDC
I brew beer, and 7-8% is usually my dividing line between “keeping beer”, and beer that needs to be served quickly. Most of the brews I’ve made from a mashing process have been stable for at least 6 months, though. Beers made from malt extract seem to go stale after about 6 weeks. If I remember correctly, that’s almost irrespective of strength.
For some of the bigger brews I’ve made, the aging process is actually essential. I brewed a quad last summer that didn’t attenuate as well as I had hoped, and carbonated sluggishly during bottle conditioning. I was embarrassed of the beer about 6 weeks after brewing it; it was chewy and flat. After 8 months in the basement, its fully carbonated, dry enough to be palatable and actually gained some complexity.
Not correcting you there – just adding to the discussion.
Louis
With the exception of the sourness of lambics which is mostly caused by cultures of Lactobacillus species. After the initial fermentation lambics will continue to sour during subsequent aging, up to and beyond the point of being undrinkable. This is why lambics are typically aged to varying degrees and blended to make gueuze or with fruit to make the variety of fruit lambics. I think they tend to be more stable after blending, however some of the gueuze I’ve had in the states makes me wonder. In principle the yeast and bacteria shouldn’t die even if they go dormant over time.
Louis:
May 30th, 2012 at 2:34 pm
Hurinomyces bruxellensis,
I learned TWO things today, both about beer. This is exceptionally rare! A Red Letter day!
Thanks.
Louis
rajkumar:
May 30th, 2012 at 2:51 pm
Still seeing only one side of the coin…. You are the other side, Brownian. Yan and Ying, or polar opposites, as it is commonly called. Get to know this and you’ll get a crystal clear understanding of why there are so many **irrational theists** in the world. Atheists like you define those theists… you cause them to exist.
rajkumar:
May 30th, 2012 at 2:51 pm
Nerd would know…
ibyea:
May 30th, 2012 at 2:54 pm
That clown picture is the creepiest picture PZ has posted so far.
Walton:
May 30th, 2012 at 2:58 pm
Thanks. That was really interesting, and directly on point. I’m not sure I’m completely convinced, though; my position is closer to what he terms “hard determinism”.
Walton:
May 30th, 2012 at 2:59 pm
Though I agree with the overwhelming majority of his article.
jonmilne:
May 30th, 2012 at 3:01 pm
I understand how you feel about the extent of Raj’s dishonesty. I suppose to me I’ve been trying the intellectual approach because I remember that I too used to be religious. Heck, many Pharyngulites as well as many other FTB members used to. So we all showed signs of intellectual dishonesty when it came to our faith in God right?
And yet I embraced secular rational reasoning, truly analysed my beliefs, and became an atheist. And you did. And many others here did. So I guess how I feel about it is that maybe I can do a good thing when I use intellect to try and sway members of the religious cults. So that I can give the same experience I had, the sense of freedom, where they aren’t constricted by Dark Age ideology and actually think outside the box.
There are two threads on the Atheist Experience – one about Kent Hovind’s phone calls from jail, and the other about how Twitter has shown just how screwed up the religious mindset is – that I find just too heartbreaking to read all of the comments of. Because the theists that show there all display some variant of not understanding how empathy and compassion work without needing God, and the whole “humans suck surely we need salvation” thing. Those comments on those threads really strengthened my desire to educate people on how atheist, secular, rational and humanist issues ACTUALLY work. :)
Jon
jonmilne:
May 30th, 2012 at 3:02 pm
Oh and that post was addressed at Nigelthebold, since it was his quote. Man do I hate it when I get lax about previewing posts and then make errors (rolls eyes) lol.
Hurinomyces bruxellensis:
May 30th, 2012 at 3:04 pm
Louis
No problem.
I’m an evangelical beer drinker; always happy to proselytize.
cm's changeable moniker:
May 30th, 2012 at 3:06 pm
OOOH! LOOK!
I found a picture of rajkumar’s brain.
Ogvorbis:
May 30th, 2012 at 3:09 pm
Those of you old enough to remember LPs, do you remember the sound of a record needle scraping all the way across an LP? That’s the sound that went through my mind.
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
May 30th, 2012 at 3:11 pm
bigbear,
Interesting reply, thanks! I’ll get back to you later — probably later today, USA time.
+++++
Walton,
If you mean his wonky attempt to mix compatibilism and hard determinism, yeah, I was not moved by that either. I just thought his criticisms of standard compatibilism were insightful.
Louis:
May 30th, 2012 at 3:30 pm
Wait…we atheists cause theists to exist?
{Sniffs}
I smell TROLLBAIT!!!!!!
{Ignores the bait}
Louis
jonmilne:
May 30th, 2012 at 3:43 pm
Raj:
If you’re going to cite a philosophical term, then at least get the fucking names right. It’s Yin and Yang, jeez louise at least do a Google search before you embarass yourself.
And I still want you to address posts #8 and #11 that I have posted in this thread.
Walton:
May 30th, 2012 at 3:51 pm
Yes, that’s true.
An important empirical question: how far does the existence of the threat of punishment for (certain) acts of violence actually reduce the occurrence of those acts of violence? And how far do the returns diminish as the severity of the threatened punishment increases?
This is a genuine question, not a rhetorical one. It’s hard to tell. It’s hard to tell even what a punishment-free society would look like; certainly there are societies without a functioning criminal justice system, but I’m not aware of one in which there are no retributive mechanisms at all (though I’m not an anthropologist and I could simply be ignorant on that subject).
rajkumar:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:01 pm
Sorry. Grumpy old man.
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:01 pm
jonmilne:
The latest theist belief I had, I gave up at around seven years old or so. A horse broke my leg (well, really the ground did), and I was in a cast that immobilized me from the waist down. My Sunday School teacher came by with a present: a Kool-Aid canteen, one of those you got by trading in box-tops. I was really touched by her kindness in coming out to the farm to give me this little gift and chat with me, and I realized as we talked that I didn’t believe a single thing she said about Jesus or God. (Not that she invoked them a lot — she really was there just to check up on me, I think.)
I can look back now to some incidences preceding that time, and I realize I never really believed at all. What little belief I had was social.
I can hardly call the process I went through “rational.” More just, none of the stories made sense. Which is a different thing entirely. I mean, I can’t make heads nor tails of quantum mechanics, but it’s rational.
I definitely understand the impulse. I used to react very much the same way — attempt to engage everyone in the hopes of spreading more enlightened understanding of exactly what atheism is.
I still try to engage pretty much everyone, to start off polite and civil. But the instant they stop responding to the things I say, and instead choose to interpret everything in some kind of straw-man version of atheism, I give up. Too many theists refuse the discussion.
There are enough that respond honestly, though, and those I’ll do my best to represent.
Aaaaanyway, as I said: I appreciate you taking on the role of the Civil Atheist. It’s an important role, one I used to assume proudly, many years ago. That frees me to be the humorous old curmudgeon. At least, I amuse myself.
rajkumar:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:04 pm
Those post are just too long for me. My memory ain’t so great. I would have already forgotten the first half of your post even before finishing the second half.
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:05 pm
rajkumar:
jonmilne, I present Exhibit A.
Louis:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:06 pm
Jon Milne,
And for all your efforts you got #117.
Not only is Raj incapable of delivering a cogent reply, he is uninterested. If I had the time I’d feel quite sorry for him.
I have appreciated your work if that helps.
Louis
rajkumar:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:08 pm
Yes. And this is exactly the reason why we are experiencing this communication gap. I was a teenager when CDs came out, or when they were invented. Even my father would have been a kid when people were listening to LPs.
Ichthyic:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:09 pm
Raj sez:
I learned how to take extreme stupidity without reacting to it.
that might be approaching fractally wrong.
the stupid has become binary stars.
I have to back away another angstrom unit.
Ichthyic:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:10 pm
I was a teenager when CDs came out
that would have been what, early 80s?
and you’re still living in your parents basement.
*tsk*
rajkumar:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:12 pm
No, early 90s. In early 80s, I was a little kid….literally.
cm's changeable moniker:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:12 pm
Rev BDC:
If I had a cellar for aging beer it would contain no beer and I’d have a headache in the morning.
(I’m not good at self-restraint.)
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:13 pm
rajkumar:
Uhm, no. First, people were still listening to LPs when CDs came out, so if you were a teenager, people were listening to LPs around that time.
Second, you’re the reason we’re experiencing this communication gap. I have a child younger than you, and we suffer no such communication problem. She’s married now (as of a month or so ago), and I have no problem communicating with her husband. Friends have children that are currently teenagers, and I have no problem communicating with them.
You refuse to communicate. You are intentionally obfuscating conversation. Your response at #119 pretty much proves this. Your refusal to actually engage in conversation is the problem.
You’re not that much younger than me, Kiddo. I was in my very early 20s when CDs came out.
Hurinomyces bruxellensis:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:14 pm
Raj
Its amusing to see you admitting that Brownian has such control over your beliefs Raj.
rajkumar:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:17 pm
And I guess this is precisely why we are speaking along the same lines. I was actually talking about some grumpy old men…
Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:20 pm
45s, LP’s, 8-track tape, reel to reel tape, cassette tapes, cds, and now mp3 players. Been there, done that, still have some.
Funny how Rajkumar can’t even get Yin and Yang right. That dates back to the ’60s when Eastern mysticism (read oriental stupidity for the gullible) invaded the hippy movement. Yawn, boring and wrong then, boring and wrong now. RK must not be very bright, as those aren’t big multisyllable words like nucleophilicity, that I deal with daily. No wonder he has trouble understanding what we write. We presume he can read above a third grade level.
Ichthyic:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:21 pm
remember this.
When you address the terminally stupid (like Raj), do recall that you should not expect a cogent response. You really are instead addressing onlookers, so tune your screeds accordingly. After all, the stupid will not pay any attention to how you word things anyway.
cm's changeable moniker:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:22 pm
Compact Disc.
1982.
Ichthyic:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:23 pm
She’s married now (as of a month or so ago)
gratz!
pentatomid:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:24 pm
CDs are early eighties. I know, because I wasn’t born when they came out.
Ichthyic:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:24 pm
We presume he can read above a third grade level.
hey, FWIW, I DID ask for elementary level science teachers to see if they could better communicate basic science principles to Raj in the last iteration.
Ogvorbis:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:25 pm
Is there anyone who has been posting on The Zombie TZT Thread that Raj has not insulted?
Anyone?
Bueller?
Amphiox:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:26 pm
Only the grossly intellectually dishonest accept extreme stupidity without reacting to it.
That is Yin and Yang, fapwit. And they are NOT polar opposites.
If you’re going to fap out Eastern Mysticism, at least make the effort to learn what that Eastern mysticism actually says.
Yin does NOT cause Yang to exist, nor does Yang “define” Yin, fapwit. If you’re going to fap out Eastern mysticism, at least make the effort to LEARN what that Eastern mysticism actually says and means.
Unsurprising that the fapwit remains too intellectually dishonest to bother learning things. If it won’t bother to learn about science, why should we expect it to make the effort to learn about Taoism, rather than take the lazy and easy route of fapping out the pop-culture bastardization of it.
Ichthyic:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:27 pm
No, early 90s. In early 80s, I was a little kid….literally.
meaning you don’t recall because you were a little kid.
Strange that Raj thinks he can change history because of the way HE remembers things. Reality doesn’t work that way, so sorry.
I also notice you haven’t denied you still live in your parent’s basement.
jonmilne:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:28 pm
“Old man”? Dude, I’m 23. I recognise your posting style is no better than a barely literate primary schooler’s, but that doesn’t make me old when I comment on it. Heck, you’re probably OLDER than me.
Okay, I take it back about how you saying “Where did I define God?” as being your most retarded statement ever. THIS now wins the prize.
Seriously, how can you forget any part of a post when all you need to do is copy and paste the entire posts that I made into the comment box, and then separate parts of the post with
rajkumar:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:28 pm
I have one question:
Before Wikipedia, how did you manage to communicate with each other?
Ichthyic:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:29 pm
CDs are early eighties. I know, because I wasn’t born when they came out.
lol. perfect.
Ichthyic:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:30 pm
I have a response:
Before the Age of Aquarius, how did your dog mange to find bones in the backyard?
rajkumar:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:32 pm
Sure it does. I can prove it you right here right now, but promise first that you won’t escape through your usual escape hatch, and/or start trolling using your many alter egos.
jonmilne:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:32 pm
Ugh, try again…
Sorry. Grumpy old man.
“Old man”? Dude, I’m 23. I recognise your posting style is no better than a barely literate primary schooler’s, but that doesn’t make me old when I comment on it. Heck, you’re probably OLDER than me.
Those post are just too long for me. My memory ain’t so great. I would have already forgotten the first half of your post even before finishing the second half.
Okay, I take it back about how you saying “Where did I define God?” as being your most retarded statement ever. THIS now wins the prize.
Seriously, how can you forget any part of a post when all you need to do is copy and paste the entire posts that I made into the comment box, and then separate parts of the post with blockquote tags so that you can address them individually? Hell, right above the comment box are instructions that can show you how to do exactly that.
Don’t you understand how you appear here? By continually refusing to address posts that thoroughly debunk the stuff that you have to have been saying, it shows a HUGE degree of intellectual dishonesty. Especially since you have requested that people go and read big long books that supposedly support your case, and at the same time also acting as if you are higher and mightier in your moral outlook than others here. If that was truly the case, you’d practice what you fucking preach, and actually address the comments that have been made that have torn apart the bullshit you’ve spouted.
I’m making one more request for you to please actually answer my posts. Otherwise, you’ll expose yourself as the ultimate contradictory hypocrite.
Amphiox:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:32 pm
The TAKE NOTES of the first half, fapwit, and refer back to them when you need to as you read the second half.
This is what INTELLECTUALLY HONEST people with memories that aren’t so great do if they want to engage HONESTLY in a discussion.
Alternately, you can admit that your memory troubles prevent you from properly participating in the discussion, shut up, and leave, fapwit. And not come back until your memory improves.
Ichthyic:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:35 pm
I can prove it you right here right now, but promise first that you won’t escape through your usual escape hatch, and/or start trolling using your many alter egos.
you can prove green is blue… blah blah inannity irrelevance stupidity… blah blah.
yes we’ve heard of your amazing powers of reason before. They fail to impress, o wise one-who-lives-in-his-parent’s-basement.
Amphiox:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:37 pm
Trolling using sockpuppets is a serious offense on this blog, fapwit.
Provide EVIDENCE of this accusation, RIGHT NOW, with quotes and IP ADDRESSES, or APOLOGIZE for SLANDERING ME, RIGHT NOW, fapwit.
jonmilne:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:38 pm
nigel the bold – 118
Thank you for your kind words, although if my last post is any indication, I think I’m now swinging in the completely opposite direction of being civil – least with people who are the epitome of dishonesty like Raj.
Louis – 121
I’m still gonna try. It may be as futile as trying to stop Leeds United fans from doing Munich chants whenever they play Man Utd, but I still think it’s worth a go, even despite Raj’s turn for the insulting and hypocrisy against me now.
pentatomid:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:38 pm
Only one such as Rajkumar would be proud of his laziness and intellectual dishonesty. Ugh, Raj, you’re a fucking embarassment.
rajkumar:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:38 pm
No I can’t prove green is blue. But I can surely prove how yin defines yang. It’s easy. It’s called RELATIVITY. And, Just FYI, it is not something that is exclusive to ‘Eastern Mysticism’.
Louis:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:38 pm
Rajkumar,
Before Wiki? We had thins thing called “knowledge”. It came from “learning stuff” and “hard work” and “having a moderately high level functioning brain”. I realise these are foreign concepts to you, but I can draw you some excellent pictures in crayon and dribble to help you understand in a medium you are familiar with.
Louis
Louis:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:39 pm
Fuck! Typos!
Louis
jonmilne:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:43 pm
Aargh, quoting issues, jeez.
Ugh, try again…
“Old man”? Dude, I’m 23. I recognise your posting style is no better than a barely literate primary schooler’s, but that doesn’t make me old when I comment on it. Heck, you’re probably OLDER than me.
Okay, I take it back about how you saying “Where did I define God?” as being your most retarded statement ever. THIS now wins the prize.
Seriously, how can you forget any part of a post when all you need to do is copy and paste the entire posts that I made into the comment box, and then separate parts of the post with blockquote tags so that you can address them individually? Hell, right above the comment box are instructions that can show you how to do exactly that.
Don’t you understand how you appear here? By continually refusing to address posts that thoroughly debunk the stuff that you have to have been saying, it shows a HUGE degree of intellectual dishonesty. Especially since you have requested that people go and read big long books that supposedly support your case, and at the same time also acting as if you are higher and mightier in your moral outlook than others here. If that was truly the case, you’d practice what you fucking preach, and actually address the comments that have been made that have torn apart the bullshit you’ve spouted.
I’m making one more request for you to please actually answer my posts. Otherwise, you’ll expose yourself as the ultimate contradictory hypocrite.
Address them Raj. Failure to do so will make you officially the biggest laughing stock hypocrite dishonest troll of the entirety of Freethought Blogs, and the biggest laughing stock hypocrite dishonest troll in the history of ANY secular atheist site.
Amphiox:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:45 pm
Provide EVIDENCE for your claims against me, FAPWIT, with examples and IP ADDRESSES, RIGHT NOW, or admit that you are LYING and are SLANDERING ME, and apologize, RIGHT NOW.
Fapwit.
Ichthyic:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:45 pm
Trolling using sockpuppets is a serious offense on this blog, fapwit.
by “alter egos” I do believe the raj considers those responding to him to actually have 3d personalities, as opposed to his flatline one. IOW, he perceives the fact that we respond at different levels to different parts of his stupidity to be as if we were multiple personalities; or, in his words: responding with many “alter egos”.
He really IS a two dimensional personage. He finds it hard to imagine how a real brain that isn’t broken actually works.
It’s actually quite remarkable when you think about it.
Amphiox:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:46 pm
The fapwit’s ignorance of Relativity appears to be as vast as its ignorance of boobs.
Ichthyic:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:47 pm
But I can surely prove how yin defines yang. It’s easy. It’s called RELATIVITY.
exactly as predicted:
response included inane irrelevancy right off the bat.
go raj!
you’re a cognitive psychologist’s wet dream.
rajkumar:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:48 pm
Louise, I can write the same about myself too. It’s easy. As I said before, just punch a few keys, and voila! By all means, keep glorifying your puny little self if it gives you a high.
If it were to ‘bright minds’ like you and your friends here, I am sure we’d still be burning women today for witch crafting, and things like cars, electricity, air planes, and medicines, would all be unheard of.
Amphiox:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:48 pm
To call the fapwit two-dimensional is a grievous slander against helpless, innocent hypocubes, who’ve done nothing to deserve such an association.
Amphiox:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:49 pm
Provide EVIDENCE of your slander, fapwit, with IP ADDRESSES, RIGHT NOW, or admit you were LYING, fapwit. RIGHT NOW.
rajkumar:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:51 pm
Amphiox
No need for evidence. Your reaction is all what is needed. And I guess, now you and your alter egos are going to need some space to do your usual dirty work. So, I’ll leave. Happy trolling!
Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:51 pm
Look, ignorant fuckwit thinks wiki is away to communicate with each other, not a resource.
Evidently it has never heard of other means for getting the news and information. Like newspapers, magazines, radio, tv, dictionaries, encyclopedias, libraries, books, atlases, etc. One wonders if its brain is filled with calcium hydroxyphosphate deposits.
Ichthyic:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:53 pm
Five bucks says Raj read “Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance” and got all mindblown.
Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:55 pm
With your lies and bullshit, you need to lead with evidence showing you aren’t a total and abject loser. Instead, you fap fuckwitted OPINION pretending it is anything other than nonsense.
pentatomid:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:55 pm
Did Raj honestly say Happy Trolling? Seriously? What the devil is wrong with him.
Louis:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:55 pm
Raj,
O RLY?
Please do elaborate! I really want to read this explanation. Spare no details.
Louis
Ichthyic:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:56 pm
I can write the same about myself too.
ROFLMAO
shades of Pete Puma here.
“I’ll help myself!”
cm's changeable moniker:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:58 pm
I seem to remember Usenet, listserv, and email.
Letters to the Daily Telegraph, too.
Ichthyic:
May 30th, 2012 at 4:59 pm
What the devil is wrong with him.
if the devil existed, he wouldn’t have anything to do with Raj.
not enough material to work with.
Ichthyic:
May 30th, 2012 at 5:01 pm
I seem to remember Usenet, listserv, and email.
surely you realize Raj just thinks he insulted us?
the implication I got is he thinks all our knowledge comes from wiki, because at some point, someone here provided a link to it.
the ignorance on display in Raj’s head is just astounding.
Amphiox:
May 30th, 2012 at 5:11 pm
Still no IP Addresses or quotes from the fapwit. Nor any apologies.
I’ll take that as an admission of lying.
myeck waters:
May 30th, 2012 at 5:23 pm
Ichthyic #169
And with all the hoggling he does, clearly his hands are not idle.
Nor are they particularly sanitary.
Tony:
May 30th, 2012 at 5:24 pm
In the process of proving, I wonder if this person intends to cite any sources or if we’re just supposed to accept anything presented at face value…
cm's changeable moniker:
May 30th, 2012 at 5:33 pm
[Aside]
Anyone remember those “household of the future” pieces from the 50s/60s/70s where technology would liberate us from drudgery and we’d use our copious free time to, I don’t know, read Chaucer, learn cello, grow bananas, or something?
Turns out they came true, but we just got to bash dolts on the web instead.
I want my future back.
(Yes, I know I could turn off the computer. Shush!)
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
May 30th, 2012 at 5:41 pm
jonmilne:
That’s the key — the point in the discussion in which you decide the other person is open to actual discussion, or just wanting to preach and/or troll. It’s all a matter of how finely-tuned your sincere-o-meter. Too fine, and you get false positives. Not fine enough, and you end up spending time on people who are not worth the effort.
All of us here are tuned differently. I’m becoming less patient as the years go by, and hardly give them the benefit of the doubt, as the odds are stacked heavily against them.
But then, you’re barely over half my age. I suspect you’re not nearly as jaded as I. That’ll come with age, and at that point, you can respect and enjoy the new up-and-comers who have the patience to engage folks like raj.
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
May 30th, 2012 at 5:43 pm
pentatomid:
He just bought a 5MW projector and has been dying to use it.
kemist, Dark Lord of the Sith:
May 30th, 2012 at 5:44 pm
Whereas if it were left to minds like yours, I guess we’d be left wondering what’s the meaning of “greenness” while contemplating boobs.
That’d help us design cars, drugs and airplanes, no doubt.
Amphiox:
May 30th, 2012 at 5:58 pm
And don’t forget, kemist, that it would JUST be contemplating, not touching, the boobs. Because contemplating is a yin activity, while touching is yang, and one must create the other, but polar opposites can never the twain meet. (And the raj has significant experience only in one of them).
Hence no babies (but also no need for cars, drugs, or airplanes).
rajkumar:
May 30th, 2012 at 6:19 pm
What’s wrong with ‘contemplating’ boobs? It’ all part of human sexuality. Quite natural. Nothing more unusual than saying I love the colour purple, or I like music.
This is true, Kesmit. A red/green colourblind person doesn’t know what the colour green looks like. Forget the science behind colour perception for a second. If I was a red/green colourblind person, and I asked you to explain and describe this colour so I could visualize it in my mind, how would you do that?
The Laughing Coyote (Canis Sativa):
May 30th, 2012 at 6:27 pm
Jonmilne:
You’re doing good, and I’m not personally offended by ‘retarded’, but watch the ableist stuff, please and thankyou.
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
May 30th, 2012 at 6:41 pm
rajkumar:
No no no. You miss my point (and ignore most of my post).
If you were a teen during the early ’90s, you’re only a decade younger than me. Your father would’ve grown up with the LP, and 8-tracks and later cassette tapes. You would’ve been a child during the final heyday of the LP, not your father. I certainly remember the scratch of the needle as it skittered across vinyl from my late teens, which would’ve made you almost 10.
But then, I have a memory that spans more than half-a-post. That might explain it.
There is no significant generation gap to excuse the lack of communication. There is no generation gap. You are not part of a generation with privileged information denied us old fogeys. There’s nothing special about your education that would impede communication with us old folks.
You seem to write in fairly grammatical sentences. Your paragraphs (when you write in full paragraphs) seem to be fairly cohesive. This suggest the actual communication problem is you.
In fact, it would seem to suggest one of these options:
1) You have nothing to communicate, but insist on posting
2) You don’t wish to communicate anything worthwhile, though you could
3) You don’t know how to communicate full concepts or ideas
4) You wish to communicate, but are afraid your ideas will be heartlessly dismantled and your feelings will be hurt
5) You are here just to see what kind of reaction you can stir up
Of those, I am only sympathetic to #3.
There may be options I have not included. If so, I’m more than willing to entertain alternate options explaining why you are impeded communication. But to do that, you’d have to actually attempt to communicate.
TL;DR (in case the preceding was too long to remember the beginning at the end): You’re not younger than many of us, so stop trying to use that as an excuse. You are the impediment to communication. Either you’re stupid, scared, or trolling.
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
May 30th, 2012 at 6:54 pm
rajkumar:
I was going to use that example in an earlier post, but decided against it.
Instead, here’s a more important part of your post:
Why would you do that?
Consider: the actual perception of the color green is a metaphysical statement. I can say, “You know how you can see different things in different brightnesses? I perceive three different brightnesses where you perceive only one. I can’t really describe those differences. I’m only describing my perception.”
Now, that’s a pretty bold statement. One might be tempted to equate that with the perception of God, or ghosts, or UFOs.
But.
I can also say, “I can prove it.” (This would be epistemology, or “How we know things.”) And then I would use science to do so. After doing some experiments with the spectrometer and different shades of various colors that all look the same in black and white, I would be able to convince a colorblind person that I actually do perceive more of the spectrum than they.
It’s really a trivial experiment.
So when you say, “Forget the science for a moment,” you are attempting to eradicate the line between metaphysics and epistemology. You are trying to eliminate the dividing line between assertion and knowledge. Sure, it’s difficult to describe the color green. But at least we can explain there is a difference, demonstrate what the difference is, and show how we know there is a difference.
And that’s a helluva lot.
Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:
May 30th, 2012 at 6:55 pm
Gentlemen, which leaves you out, do it in private and surreptitiously. Only fuckwitted losers like you make a deal out of it.
It doesn’t matter. It doesn’t prove anything other than language is a product of the human experience. If you think it means anything else, cite the literature to back up your claim, and use language like “this is what I think, and this (link to said evidence) is the evidence to back it up”. Otherwise, all you have is a failure of language, nothing more, and definitely not the imaginary deity you are trying to place there. It says nothing at all about your lack of evidence for your imaginary deity, which is nothing but a delusion in your mind…Put up or shut the fuck up loser.
cm's changeable moniker:
May 30th, 2012 at 7:16 pm
(Notes in passing that Raj has yet to post in a language other than English.)
*waves at CR*
kemist, Dark Lord of the Sith:
May 30th, 2012 at 7:19 pm
Why would I do that.
The only interesting thing that can be learned out of subjective experiences is how the brain works.
The rest is just the idiotic ramblings of people who only think about things and never test their reasoning to see if it fits with the real world.
Beyond pointing to a spectrometer and proving that I can differentiate two wavelenghts that he cannot and that this machine, which has a better light detector than us both can also detects the difference ?
Nothing.
It’s pointless. It’s not his brain that’s defective, it’s his eyes.
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
May 30th, 2012 at 7:42 pm
kemist:
Terrorist fist jab.
Damn straight, my friend.
See this, raj? We all pretty much have the same answer. It’s science that sets our knowledge apart from yours.
Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:
May 30th, 2012 at 7:50 pm
Where’s your evidence to back up your fuckwitted and silly question Rajkumar? One would think you are nothing but a reality bereft druggie without a coherent thought in what’s left of your mind. Put up or shut the fuck up with real evidence. I’ll even link to where to find it, so your only excuse is you tacitly ceding to us the argument.
Amphiox:
May 30th, 2012 at 8:13 pm
Another post from the fapwit, another post with no IP address to back up its slanderous accusations, another post without an apology for slandering.
Another tacit admission of LYING.
Fapfap.
Amphiox:
May 30th, 2012 at 8:13 pm
NO.
Amphiox:
May 30th, 2012 at 8:18 pm
Take one green card and one yellow card, point to the green one and say “this one is green”.
Done, fapwit.
The additional fact that the red/green colourblind person won’t be able to distinguish green from red is a separate issue and also irrelevant.
rajkumar:
May 30th, 2012 at 8:23 pm
For starters, you would, or could, do that because it has absolutely no relevance whatsoever to the questions I have been asking you. However, if you are trying to impress your friends here, well, may be you have impressed them after all, because every time one of you parrots some information from Wikipedia, it leaves the rest of you highly impressed. Apparently!
That wouldn’t explain anything about the ‘greenness’ of the colour green — it would only explain how humans perceive colours. The same old high school science, and the same old Wikipedian arsenal. Your (so-called) high-tech scientific explanations won’t explain a thing about what the colour green actually looks like to those who can see it.
To understand this better, I ask you the same question again. How about visualizing the colour ultra-violet? Can you visualize this colour by going the high school science of colour perception?
rajkumar:
May 30th, 2012 at 8:26 pm
Gentlemen, who secretly watch porn, and publicly praise the breasts of their wives? No, I have got something that suits you better. Dirty Old Scoundrel. DOS.
chigau (違う):
May 30th, 2012 at 9:07 pm
What color are the ‘go’ traffic lights in Japan?
(Hint: same as Australia)
What is that color called?
Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:
May 30th, 2012 at 9:11 pm
No citations from Rajkumar. He tacitly agrees his evidenceless argument is bullshit. Nothing but lies and bullshit. He can change this by citing the literature at any time…or shutting the fuck up like the evidenceless loser it is…
Amphiox:
May 30th, 2012 at 9:16 pm
Two more posts. Still no IP addresses. Still no apologies.
Two more admissions of LYING by the fapwit.
And more worthless fapping about on pointless, useless, already debunked points.
Fapfapfap.
John Morales:
May 30th, 2012 at 9:31 pm
The specimen bleats*:
Presumably, now it’s literally a goat.
(Ain’t the internet wonderful?
On the internet, no-one knows that you’re a…
…
Ah, never mind)
–
* Literally, by its own claim. :)
kemist, Dark Lord of the Sith:
May 30th, 2012 at 9:44 pm
That’s ’cause your questions make no freaking sense. I told you that more than 100 posts ago. But appearently you insist on thinking your pointless philosophical masturbation has deep meaning.
Fapwikipediafap.
Lalala I can’t hear you, because wikipedia, high school science, blabla.
“Greenness” only exists in human heads, you bottomless idiot.
That’s been the point we’ve been trying to make since the very beginning, and that you refuse to address.
“Greenness” is a product of our brains and has nothing to do with the true nature of anything except with the functionning of the brain. To think about it without addressing how the brain produces it is pointless mental masturbation that will never bring new useful knowledge since it has no link to the real world.
FossilFishy (Lobed-finned Killer of Threads):
May 30th, 2012 at 10:05 pm
I awoke this morning with the memory of a young lady towards whom I had acted quite beastly almost twenty years ago. It wasn’t malice exactly, just the callow ineptitude of youth. That memory has soured my day in such a way that I wish I could somehow apologize and make amends. But then here comes Raj once again, riding a big old train ‘o stupid.
I actually slapped my thigh as I laughed at that; I never do that!
Sure, I still feel sad that the more enlightened me cannot go back and stop my idiot youthful self from being a such an asshole, but thanks to Raj I once again realise that at least I’m capable of learning.
Hurinomyces bruxellensis:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:08 pm
This is either a lie or a willful misunderstanding. The question if I remember is about whether we could detect god in some way without having a prior definition of him.
The facts are that we:
1) can measure things we can’t sense directly
2) have discovered things well outside of our common experience (again with the electron example)
3) have no evidence from any science that seems to be leading toward a god. The universe works just fine without that stupid thing.
Stop your fucking obscurantism.
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:16 pm
Wow, just wow
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:19 pm
rajkumar:
And what is “greenness” but perception of a physical attribute?
You talk as if there were something inherently unique about “greenness,” as if it were distinct from its spectrum. But that’s the point. We define green by our perception. Or we can define it by its spectrum. Either way works out the same.
Your question is based in the supposition that our perception is not tied to the physical attributes that define the limits of “green.” It’s your supposition that is wrong, not the problem of defining “green.”
There is no problem.
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:23 pm
Y’know what I find funny?
You ask a bunch of atheists about the problems of defining “green,” and you end up with essentially the same answer.
You ask a hundred theist about the problems of defining “God,” and you end up with a hundred different answers.
What’s that tell you?
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
May 30th, 2012 at 10:44 pm
rajkumar:
And?
Trying to explain the experience of an orgasm won’t do it justice to someone who has never experienced it. Trying to explain the flavor of alligator won’t do it justice to anyone who has not tasted chicken.
Big deal.
These are all subjective experiences. Both of these are far harder to quantize than trying to explain the color green (which has an analog to anyone who can see in at least grey tones). And again: big deal.
So, what’s your point? That there’s some sort of parallel between these things and the experience of God?
If so, you have a long row to hoe. You have to identify the proper source of the feeling of divinity. For instance, it might just be the thought of a nipple in your mouth that makes your penis all tingly, and not the presence of God. Or maybe you’re fucking high as a NOAA weather balloon.
The color “green” can be associated with great certainty to a certain spectrum. (You know that “science” you’d like us to ignore? Sorry, we can’t. It’s what allows us to be sure of our knowledge, such as what constitutes the color “green.”)
In direct contrast, your perception of a god cannot be correlated with anything other than various mental states. The same kind of states that have been associated with other hallucinatory experiences.
So forgive me if I don’t allow you to disregard science. It’s the bit that allows us to distinguish reality from fantasy, fact from fiction. If you wish to continue to believe only what you desire to believe, then feel free. But it’s quite disingenuous of you to think we should accept your fantasies as reality.
Especially when the best defense you can muster has something to do with our inability to describe “green,” when in fact we can both describe it, and define it.
Can you define “god?”
Amphiox:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:00 pm
“Greenness” is NOT a thing to be described, it is a quality used to describe things in reality – namely things that emit or reflect electromagnetic radiation of a certain range of wavelengths (or the radiation itself).
It is NOT a reality to be or that can be described. It is a DESCRIPTION of reality.
The fapwit’s perseveration in demanding a description of a descriptive term simply demonstrates that the fapwit doesn’t have functional language capacity, in ANY language, first, second, third, or eighteenth.
It doesn’t know the difference between nouns and adjectives.
Either that, or it is perpetrating just another one of its tired, dishonest “pranks”.
Amphiox:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:04 pm
It doesn’t need to.
To explain what the colour green looks like to those who can see it requires just one word. One word which, upon reading it, anyone who can see green will INSTANTLY know and understand exactly what green looks like, which is ALL that an explanation in human language is required to do.
That one word is “green”.
The fapwit is just wasting its and our time fapping about this ridiculously pitiful and worthless tangent.
Snoof:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:09 pm
Xe can, but he won’t. And xe acts like this proves something.
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:12 pm
Snoof:
Oh, it proves something all right.
Just not what xe wishes it would. It’s like yan and ying, y’know?
Lyn M, Purveyor of Fine Aphorisms of Death:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:50 pm
@ Ogvorbis #136
He’s missed me so far. I’m thinking it’s because he realises that I am a woman, and then he thinks that means I have breasts, and then his teensy brain melts down and flows out his ears.
rajkumar:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:51 pm
Yes. True. And once again, no one is concerned with how the human brain produces ‘greenness’. It’s a completely different discussion. COMPLETELY DIFFERENT in CAPITALS and bold.
Now, we are concerned with this:
First, a red/green colour blind person is someone who has never seen the colour green, and because the person has never seen the colour, he doesn’t know what ‘green’ looks like in its ‘original form’. To see the colour in its ‘original form’ means, seeing the colour with a normal colour vision.
Now suppose such a person would like to know what the green colour looks like in its ‘original form’. Suppose you have a normal colour vision, and I am such a red/green colour blind person. I ask you to ‘describe’ this colour to me in any way you like — even using your high school science — so I am able to get a picture of what seeing this colour is like in its original form. How would you do that? Do you think you would be able to do that by telling me the wavelength of this colour, and a little bit about the colour spectrum from here and there?
And, yes, my questions are not going to make any sense if you have no damn clue how to answer them. But I see, you are on the same frequency now as the rest of your group. Looks like you all have the same dictionary.
Lyn M, Purveyor of Fine Aphorisms of Death:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:53 pm
tl;dr = I know same as about god. You just have a limited mind.
Amphiox:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:57 pm
Apropos for the raj:
http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2626#comic
Brownian:
May 30th, 2012 at 11:58 pm
<blockquoteTo see the colour in its ‘original form’ means, seeing the colour with a normal colour vision.
You think that’s colour in its ‘original form’? What are you, simple?
You said you came here to learn. This point has been explained to you numerous times. Again, the problem lies with you.
rajkumar:
May 31st, 2012 at 12:03 am
OK. Point taken. Now, I’ll just wait for the answer… from Kismet the Dark Seth Lord
rajkumar:
May 31st, 2012 at 12:04 am
Sorry …. kemist, Dark Lord of the Sith
theophontes 777:
May 31st, 2012 at 12:12 am
@
Oh Lordy, you are going to start Oriental Philosophy next?
@ Ichthyic
Summation in one sentence:
Anyone?
@ cm’s changeable moniker
Good point. Reminds me of pretending to be Afrikaans.
@
LOL
Ichthyic:
May 31st, 2012 at 12:14 am
you are going to start “dry humping” Oriental Philosophy next?
yes, that’s exactly the right imagery.
Ichthyic:
May 31st, 2012 at 12:19 am
Because contemplating is a yin activity, while touching is yang
well, yan and ying, according to Raj, and of course, with THOSE one generates the other, so contemplation necessarily generates touching, and to touch the breast then forces you into contemplation… which forces you to touch… contemplate… touch…con…touch… *fizzle* *spark*
*wheeeeeeezzzeeee*
Hurinomyces bruxellensis:
May 31st, 2012 at 12:26 am
How do you even know we experience the color green the same way? You are assuming that my sensation of green is the same as yours, but we can’t compare that directly. What I can do is name some sensation I get from looking at the grass so that we have a consistent word for it, and then investigate the physical phenomenon that causes that sensation. We can’t directly communicate our ‘original forms’ of green to each other any more than we can communicate them to my dad, who is colorblind.
Your platonic form for the experience of green an invalid abstraction based on an unwarranted assumption. Its the physical phenomenon that is primary to what “green” is and not our sensory experience.
rajkumar:
May 31st, 2012 at 12:27 am
Or, put it differently, Kemist, the brain of a red/green colour blind person cannot generate ‘greenness’, because the input it is receiving from the eyes about colours is not complete. Now, do you know a way to make the brain of a red/green colour blind person generate ‘greenness’?
rajkumar:
May 31st, 2012 at 12:29 am
Hurinomyces bruxellensis
I thought ‘mental masturbation’ wasn’t much appreciated here?
Hurinomyces bruxellensis:
May 31st, 2012 at 12:34 am
Well then let me make my response shorter. Your ‘original form’ is meaningless. Its a neat trick we got from evolution to help us tell if the fruit is ripe.
“Green” would still exist even if no one could see it, we just wouldn’t have a special name for it.
Ichthyic:
May 31st, 2012 at 12:34 am
Now, do you know a way to make the brain of a red/green colour blind person generate ‘greenness’?
you do realize that a color blind person still generates a grey value for the color they are not processing?
oh wait, you haven’t a clue how any of this works, even at an elementary school level.
carry on, Khan Noonian Singh.
theophontes 777:
May 31st, 2012 at 12:41 am
Dictionary (link to SMBC)
We were just discussing xtian mannerists upthread. Now steps into the same steaming cowpat.
….
@ Hurinomyces bruxellensis
Exactly this. How our minds fuck with the phenomenon is our own concern. A troll getting jabbed with a sharp stick could perceive that as “green”.
Ichthyic:
May 31st, 2012 at 12:46 am
A troll getting jabbed with a sharp stick could perceive that as “green”.
indeed, not just a troll…
synesthesia
(I linked to the wiki on it just for Raj)
Amphiox:
May 31st, 2012 at 12:48 am
Four more faps from the fapwit. No IP addresses to support its sockpuppetry accusation. No apologies for slander.
Four more admissions of lying.
Fapfap.
Guy:
May 31st, 2012 at 12:55 am
Just lurking around and saw this
“A red/green colourblind person doesn’t know what the colour green looks like.”
this is not actually true. A red/green colourblind person is perfectly capable of seeing green and distinguishing it from other colours, just like she/he is able to see red. Even if you put a red object next to a green object they would be able to tell which is green and which is red.
The problem for a red/green colourblind person comes when you take different shades of green and red and mix them together, then they are unable to see which is which.
I know this because I am red/green colourblind.
This does not actually take anything away from the point of the original post, just thought you may find that of interest (or not).
theophontes 777:
May 31st, 2012 at 12:57 am
Bible quote of the day:
And this is taken literally:
Until reality steps in:
Serpent-Handling’ West Virginia Pastor Dies From Snake Bite
TL;DR version :
If only more had the courage to actually follow the !
Amphiox:
May 31st, 2012 at 1:01 am
The three opsins in humans DON’T, point of fact, just register “red”, “green”, or “blue”, like some computer. Each one has a continuous and broad absorption spectrum. EACH ONE actually covers almost the entire visible spectrum, but they just have different peak response.
The brain integrates the varying INTENSITY of the response from each of the cone opsins when stimulated by any particular wavelength of light, and produces the subjective sensation of color from this.
http://www.unm.edu/~toolson/human_cone_response.htm
As you can see, the “red” opsin actually peaks in YELLOW in humans, and is actually kind of pissy at detecting red wavelengths.
And the one of the other opsins, and rod rhodopsin, which red-green colour blind people have, both actually PEAK in the green.
Red green colour-blind people see colours the same way most mammals (except Old World Monkeys, Apes, and some New World Monkeys) do.
They absolutely CAN see green, and CAN distinguish even shades of green.
They can, in fact, distinguish green from practically EVERYTHING except certain shades of red, and vice versa.
Amphiox:
May 31st, 2012 at 1:04 am
Note that the fapwit, in continuing to fap on about describing “greenness”, has deliberately ignored my comment about how green is NOT an object in reality to be described, but a DESCRIPTION of the properties of objects in reality.
It is fundamentally dishonest to ask anyone to describe a description.
It is even more fundamentally dishonest to ignore it when one is called out on it.
But we already knew the fapwit was a pitiful intellectually dishonest liar.
Fapfap.
Amphiox:
May 31st, 2012 at 1:08 am
The raj vs Reality, round 1984.
Current score: Reality 1984, Raj 0.
rajkumar:
May 31st, 2012 at 1:51 am
What exactly is wrong with you people? Why can’t you understand something so simple?
rajkumar:
May 31st, 2012 at 2:00 am
The red/green colour blind person cannot see green as green would be seen by someone with normal colour vision. A red/green colour blind would see green as shades of yellow, blue, and red/brown. Sometimes even black. This is why red/green colour blind get very confused when they see yellow-green, blue-green, and murky green. The colour blind people I know of, for them, yellow-green is seen as pure yellow, blue green is seen as pure blue, and murky green is seen as red/brown or even black. Pure green, such as fresh grass, gets confused with colours like orange, light brown, and yellow.
Guy:
May 31st, 2012 at 2:15 am
Lyn M, Purveyor of Fine Aphorisms of Death:
May 31st, 2012 at 2:17 am
Guy, Guy, Guy, don’t be upset. You just don’t understand that raj knows everything. So your reply is not going to be of use. Merely because it is factual in no way influences old raj there.
Guy:
May 31st, 2012 at 2:22 am
whoops, bit of a blockquote fail. Meant to have this before what was posted
echidna:
May 31st, 2012 at 2:29 am
This is true for my red/green colour-blind husband, except that he also cannot distinguish some shades of green from greys of the same tone.
Hurinomyces bruxellensis:
May 31st, 2012 at 2:30 am
Because we care about the way reality actually works, rather than the way its supposed to work according to your weirdly distorted simplification. I understand what you are saying, I just dispute your assertion that it illustrates anything useful about reality.
You are implying that our perception of green is of primary importance to our understanding of green, and that is false.
You are assuming that all people who aren’t classified as color blind see green the same way, and that is unsubstantiated.
There is even evidence that the way our first language deals with color effects the colors we are able to distinguish.
If you look at the video I linked, you will see that members of the Himba tribe appear to develop a different perception of color than we have, based on the categories they have invented to classify it. That doesn’t change the fact that we all experience the same physical phenomenon of visible light.
Caine, Fleur du mal:
May 31st, 2012 at 2:35 am
Ichthyic:
True. My rats could think circles around Misogyniraj all day long and into the night.
Lyn M, Purveyor of Fine Aphorisms of Death:
May 31st, 2012 at 2:37 am
Waits with bated breath for raj to ‘splain everything OR say it was a joke OR change the subject
Which will it be?
Lyn M, Purveyor of Fine Aphorisms of Death:
May 31st, 2012 at 2:42 am
Oh dang! I forgot he might flounce! Again.
echidna:
May 31st, 2012 at 2:47 am
I know this is old ground, but I’m sure it’s worth saying again.
“Green” light is light of wavelength ~ 560–490 nm. Our perception of “green” will vary according to the ability of our eyes to perceive it, and subsequent processing that goes on inside the brain.
If we were all blind, there would still be “green” light, and we would still be able to measure it with appropriate instruments, because it’s defined as something corresponding to a property of reality (to paraphrase Amphiox badly).
Raj is trying to use the limitations of language and perception to invoke mysticism. It won’t work here.
jonmilne:
May 31st, 2012 at 2:48 am
nigelthebold
Yeah, at this point I just feel like goading the guy into breaking a rule. Like saying to him “Hey Raj, that lovely Mr PZ Myers just told me to tell you that you’re allowed to post elsewhere on Pharyngula now. I know this because PZ is planning to create ‘Post of the Month’ and ‘Poster of the Month’ awards on his site, and I’m totally a shoo-in to win both of those awards so you can totally trust what I’m saying!”
Admittedly, that’s not actually true, although it would be helluva funny if Raj took that as true and then started posting elsewhere on the site based on my word and then got banhammered for it.
Although that said, I would like it if PZ did actually do “Post of the Month” and “Poster of the Month” awards for his site. Some healthy competition amongst us guys would be some pretty damn cool stuff.
jonmilne:
May 31st, 2012 at 2:50 am
Laughing Coyote:
<blockquoteYou’re doing good, and I’m not personally offended by ‘retarded’, but watch the ableist stuff, please and thankyou.
Yeah, my bad on that. I’ll just refer to him as a Mind Blowingly Stupid Fapwit (TM) from now on. :)
jonmilne:
May 31st, 2012 at 2:53 am
Amphiox:
If only Room 101 existed, then we could put Raj there… :)
Caine, Fleur du mal:
May 31st, 2012 at 2:54 am
Jonmilne:
What, the Mollies aren’t enough?
jonmilne:
May 31st, 2012 at 2:59 am
Raj, you’re still adapting a “higher and mightier” attitude with regards to your posts. Prove it. Practice what you preach. Actually address the posts that have been actively ripping apart what you have to say. For once in your life show some intellectual honesty.
Post 8 of this thread reloaded:
I really hate to be the one that’s going to end up doing the biggest pwnage of Raj yet again – I mean, not to blow my own trumpet, but I was the one who lead him into asking his most stupid question ever on this site, namely “Where did I define God?” – but on the other hand I’m a massive egotist and having a whole bunch of people praise me on ruthlessly I burned him last time has turned out to be a massively alluring factor in tempting me to massively pwn him again:
Raj, with regards to this God that you’ve posited on this site, does it actually make ANY difference whatsoever whether we believe in it or not? Like, for instance, do you think that us non-believers will be doomed to an eternity in hell if we don’t believe, while thinking that believers like yourself will be granted with life in heaven? This is a hook of many of the mainstream religions in order to attract followers, which namely takes the form of what I like to call the “Reward/Punishment Gambit”. Speaking as an ex-Christian, I can testify to the basic effectiveness of this type of marketing from followers of any specific God: “Believe what we say and you will be rewarded with paradise, don’t believe in what we say and you’ll be tortured forever!”
A simple “Yes” or “No” answer will be sufficient here, but either way you lose.
If you don’t believe that there’s any real benefit to believing and drawback to not believing in your God, then there’s even less reason to both believe and worship your God since your God can’t do shit if we don’t do those things. Heck, it will make your God even lamer than the mainstream Gods, and that will be one heck of an achievement.
If however you believe that we will get punished if we don’t believe, then you’ve contradicted yourself again and are therefore subject to another loss. See Raj, it was you who said to us that “it was by God’s own design” that we were supposedly made to be “limited in our understandings about God and how he works”. And yet if you think that your God is capable of rewarding/punishing people for believing/not believing in it, then you’ve added yet another definition to a seemingly “undefinable” God, namely that which can make judgments on humanity. Furthermore, it also makes your God if it exists a complete fucking morally corrupt asshole since it punishes people for not believing in it EVEN THOUGH IT WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR SUPPOSEDLY LIMITING PEOPLE’S MINDS SO THAT THEY WOULDN’T SEE EVIDENCE TO BELIEVE IN IT IN THE FIRST PLACE.
theophontes 777:
May 31st, 2012 at 3:06 am
@ Caine
Teh Zollies ?
Caine, Fleur du mal:
May 31st, 2012 at 3:08 am
Theophontes:
Heh. Difficult enough already to keep up with Molly. My OM Nom list, she is long.
jonmilne:
May 31st, 2012 at 3:09 am
Post 11 of this thread reloaded:
You defined him as something that couldn’t be defined, and where as a result minds trying to define him are limited in how they can do so. But that’s STILL A DEFINITION. If you TRULY couldn’t define God for us, you’d simply say “I don’t know” and admit you’re either ignorant or being simply disingenuous on the subject. Either way, you’ve self-contradicted yourself.
The bolded parts answer your question by what I mean. What purpose does it serve for “God” to make it so that it’s creation can’t understand exactly what it is? When crafting a supposedly “intelligently designed” world, what benefit exactly would it serve to God to have its created people not comprehend it, and what benefit would it serve to the people to be ignorant of the meaning of the supposedly existent God to which you posit?
My question was: What is the practicality of “limiting our minds” so that we “cannot understand God”? Nonetheless, even if one buys into the notion that your paragraph just there – rather than amounting to more obfuscation – is even remotely considerable as an actual answer to my question, we still have the problem that you’ve just self-contradicted yourself AGAIN.
On the one hand, you claim our minds are so limited that we can’t comprehend God, and yet nonetheless this is a God that you claim to worship. Which means that if that’s truly the case, then despite the fact you have a human mind and therefore have all the “limitations” you talked about, you regardless still seem to UNDERSTAND and COMPREHEND your God of choice enough to WORSHIP it. But by your own logic, that’s simply not possible. There’s close to zero sense in worshipping any of the Gods that have been given certain definitions of characteristics by some of the more main-stream religious cults. There’s ABSOLUTE ZERO sense in worshipping something that you yourself claim that you as a human absolutely do not understand.
You add an addendum to your point on colour, namely about I how apparently I should not present you with any stuff on the science behind colour perception and the colour spectrum.
What you’re pulling here is similar to something Ray Comfort did in his interview on the Atheist Experience, wherein Ray asked the AE hosts to give him evidence on evolution. I will display the link later on in my post, but what was particularly revealing about the exchange was that the hosts gave Ray some damn good evidence (namely to do with how the development of vaccines are aided, the great deal of transitional fossils, the DNA evidence, the observation of speciation in the lab including flies and bacteria) and Ray rejects all the evidence the hosts present based on his presuppositions despite it being perfectly valid.
That’s what you’re doing here by rejecting the scientific explanations of how colour spectrums and perceptions actually work. They don’t fit with your world-view, so you disregard them, despite having nothing remotely decent resembling evidence to offer as an alternative explanation.
As for what you say about the Big Bang, again I have to invoke the Ray Comfort/AE interview, namely the part where Ray asks the AE hosts “tell me what was in the beginning without saying I don’t know”. As RationalWiki points out: (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/User:Feredir28/The_Atheist_Experience_debates_Ray_Comfort)
Without evidence, and proper application of the Scientific Process, you cannot just claim that your version of events is the truth. I’m sure I’m not the first person to say this to you, and I almost certainly won’t be the last, but the burden of proof is on YOU.
Sorry buddy, but to paraphrase a great mind, Richard Lenski when he was confronting Conservapedians on their similar level of ignorance and obfuscating and intellectual dishonesty that you’re displaying (especially since you disregarded the entire first half of my last post where I rip Scwartz to shreds):
“I offer this lengthy reply because we are educators as well as scientists. It is my sincere hope that some readers might learn something from this exchange, even if you do not.”
jonmilne:
May 31st, 2012 at 3:11 am
Caine:
Ah, thanks, I wasn’t aware of their existence. Although that said it would still be nice if PZ did an “Individual Post of the Month” as part of the Mollies to add his already existent award recognising posters.
Lyn M, Purveyor of Fine Aphorisms of Death:
May 31st, 2012 at 3:13 am
Because you are making sense and I have run out of dodges.
Caine, Fleur du mal:
May 31st, 2012 at 3:17 am
Jonmilne:
I don’t think that’s necessary and it would pretty much be an impossible task. Lots of us provide links to various posts by someone we nominate, which is nice, but given how many outstanding posts can be spotted simply within a single thread, in a matter of hours, every single day…nah.
Also, the OMs are decided by The Horde™, not PZ. Consider it…peer review. ;p
theophontes 777:
May 31st, 2012 at 3:20 am
@ jonmilne
< a href=”" title=”" > is your friend . Right click on the date stamp of the post. “copy link location” to copy. Then place in the href brackets.
Add title and comment and close with < /a >
You get, for example, your comment at #11.
theophontes 777:
May 31st, 2012 at 3:28 am
@ Caine
The Zollies would be a kind of Anti-Molly award for the incorrigibly ignorant. raj would be a likely candidate.
(Imagine if raj put all that energy and tenacity into actually communicating, rather than expounding on imaginary sky-gods!)
Louis:
May 31st, 2012 at 3:30 am
If I were contemplating some boobs and touching my yang, would I make more sense than the sound of one hand falling in a colour blind green forest?
Louis
Lyn M, Purveyor of Fine Aphorisms of Death:
May 31st, 2012 at 3:38 am
Quoted for the … uh, the … you know … the thing.
jonmilne:
May 31st, 2012 at 3:40 am
Theophontes777
My post here, followed by my post here. Thanks man :)
theophontes 777:
May 31st, 2012 at 3:45 am
@ Louis
Louis, a Beer master during the Pharyngula era, received an impudent troll who came to inquire about Zen.
{the scene: a small bar podium in a bamboo forest. neophyte rajkumar goes to meet master Louis}:
Louis served beer. He poured his visitor’s glass full, and then kept on pouring.
The troll watched the overflow until he no longer could restrain himself. “It is overfull. No more will go in!”
“Like this glass,” Louis said, “you are full of your own opinions and speculations. How can I show you Zen unless you first empty your glass?”
theophontes 777:
May 31st, 2012 at 3:49 am
@ jonmilne
If you are on Firefox (you should be, damnit): text formatting toolbar
rajkumar:
May 31st, 2012 at 3:54 am
A red/green colour blind cannot see green because his eyes do not have the complete hardware — his eyes cannot pick these wavelengths, and his brain doesn’t receive information about these wavelengths. On the other hand, a person who has a normal colour vision, also has the complete hardware in his eyes, so his eyes send complete information about colours to the brain. This is the difference between a red/green colour blind person, and someone who has a normal colour vision.
Of course, not every colour blind, and not everyone with normal colour vision, would see colours in the exact same way. But, we can draw a line between how colour blinds see colours and how people with normal colour vision see colours, based on the fact that one group has eyes that can see the entire visible colour spectrum, and the other group has eyes that cannot see the entire visible spectrum.
But no need to go into finer details. I gave this example to explain a very simple point, which is: Something we haven’t experienced with our sense before, we cannot imagine it.
A red/green colour blind has not experienced the colour green, so he cannot imagine this colour.
pentatomid:
May 31st, 2012 at 4:01 am
Raj,
So what? Seriously, who gives a fuck. The fact that there might be some things out there we can’t imagine at this moment is evidence for what exactly?
theophontes 777:
May 31st, 2012 at 4:08 am
@ pentatomid
There is no lack of imagination from teh goddists. Only a pitying lack of evidence.
Ichthyic:
May 31st, 2012 at 4:49 am
What exactly is wrong with you people? Why can’t you understand something so simple?
you’ve never ever bothered to consider that it’s your concept that is flawed and simplistic, have you.
did you ever look up what Dunning Kruger syndrome is?
because you’re the fucking poster boy for it.
they should pay you.
rajkumar:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:43 am
I can agree with the ‘simplistic’ part of your comment, because ‘simplistic’ doesn’t mean flawed. But isn’t it ironic that what you call ‘simplistic’, others in your group call it ‘mental masturbation’?
Anyway, you haven’t yet pointed out (rationally) how do you see my concept as flawed?
jonmilne:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:47 am
Hey Raj, I’ve just gotten an email from PZ Myers, thanking me for my wonderful contributions on this site, and since he’s busy right now he’s made me his personal messenger! Isn’t that cool?
Anyways, my first duty as a messenger is to tell you that you’re allowed to post elsewhere on Pharyngula now. Any thread you want buddy, you can post in. I know this because PZ has personally revealed to me with emails that are so totally super-secret that I can’t show anyone else that I’m totally a shoo-in to win the May 2012 Mollie award for Poster of the Month so you can totally trust what I’m saying and I’ve totally got evidence to back it up but hey you just have to believe what I’m saying first!
jonmilne:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:48 am
*wink* *wink*.
*wink*.
rajkumar:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:54 am
That’s so nice of him and you. But I think it’s time to leave this blog. Just posting my final few messages. Sorry for not replying you, by the way.
rajkumar:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:59 am
And before I go, you are doing one hell of a lousy job acting like a 23 year old. It is very hard to hide who you really are.
rajkumar:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:59 am
WINK?
Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:04 am
Your concept has been refuted seven ways from Sunday. You are too dumb to see you have no argument. Here’s your problem. You are all OPINION and bullshit. Try getting evidence to back up your arguments. Otherwise, you are admitting to us you are WRONG. And you are WRONG, and won’t ever be right without evidence….
jonmilne:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:09 am
I assure you I am 23. I was born on the 5th of September 1988 in Rutherglen, Scotland. I lived up until the age in 8 in East Kilbride near Glasgow. I moved in 1997 to Wakefield, West Yorkshire in England where I have been living ever since. Furthermore, if Mr Myers were to present all the IPs of all the posters here, it would confirm that I am posting with a different geographical location. I could also if I so wished show you my birth certificate and other legal documents that would prove who I am.
Also, Mr Myers just sent me another email to pass onto you. It says “Oh go on Raj, just post in any of the other threads to your heart’s content, nothing will happen, promise! Would Jon really lie to you when he’s been so civil and patient with you? Sincerely PZ Myers”
rajkumar:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:19 am
JonMilne, I still don’t believe you. But don’t worry too much about convincing me though. You are not going to win a medal from me for being the honest lad that you are trying to act you are. YOu just don’t sound like a 23 year old — not even close. More like 60+ give or take.
Anyway, thanks so much again for sharing the info, but still not interested. I have written to my heart’s content already — all there was to be said here.
I wish you good luck in your ‘future endeavours.’
Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:29 am
Then your heart has zero intellectual content. NOTHING BUT BULLSHIT.
jonmilne:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:36 am
If I had a webcam and a mic, I would also be able to engage in a Skype conversation with you, which would also prove that I’m certainly not 60 but I am in fact 23.
Face it dude, I’m younger than you. I recognise that it’s a bitter pill to swallow that you just got your ass handed to you by someone half or at least two-thirds your age, but that’s the harsh reality buddy.
Plus, in a website that is purely “text” orientated, how exactly can I “sound” like any age? Surely it’s “looking” like any age. If you’re judging by the way I write, then it’s simply the positive side-effect of having a damn good education and having English Literature and English Language being my favourite subjects in high school and getting good grades in them as a result. Just because I corrected you on a woeful spelling of a philosophical term does not make me “old”. Au contraire, it makes me educated.
Besides, what are we to make of your grammar and incoherancy on this site? I can buy that you were around when LPs were first released, but the way you type makes me believe that you were probably home-schooled, which would explain a lot about why you are borderline illiterate and are seriously lacking in the applications of scientific, secular, and rational logics.
rajkumar:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:37 am
True. Intellect and logic are mind stuff, and they belongs to the mind, not the heart. Heart is the sign of love, warm feelings and emotions. Ever wonder why humans use heart as a sign of love?
rajkumar:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:45 am
The difference between you and me is, dude, I am not trying to convince you. You are free to believe anything you want to believe about me. You, on the other hand, are trying so hard to convince me, as if your life depended on it. If I am wrong about you, then it is ME who is wrong, not you. So, don’t feel threatened about it. Just smile and brush it aside.
It may be my last post. All depends on how Nerd responds to my last post to him.
pentatomid:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:45 am
Because hearts are juicy and sweet and totally delicious? Especially when freshly ripped from a kitten’s ribcage.
mikmik:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:51 am
I’d like to add, if I may be so bold, Nerd, that it’s a particularly inferior class of bullshit at that. Raj, You are not going to win a medal for being the dishonest lad that you are trying to act you are.
The search for the next danielhaven continues.
FossilFishy (Lobed-finned Killer of Threads):
May 31st, 2012 at 6:56 am
Oh Rajy, please don’t leave us! No one else makes me bark with laughter like you do. My wife gave me a pleased look after I reacted to the above line. She thinks that I work too much and that it’s making me humourless. For the sake of my marriage I emplore you to find it in your, er, heart to continue to fight the good fight here.
jonmilne:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:56 am
Nope, your heart makes no decisions whatsoever about who you choose to love, have affection for and feel the drive to protect them. It’s all in the mind too, you dumb fuck.
As for why the heart is used as a sign of love, it’s purely because a bunch of literary artists like Shakespeare started using the heart as a symbol of conveying that kind of feeling, then a whole bunch of other literary artists followed suit. And then we saw the invention of Valentine’s Day as a means to commercialise the whole love thing and cartoon hearts became a convenient symbol for Valentines Cards and presents to be plastered all over.
Stop doing Karl Pilkington impressions. He at least manages to be funny and still has some degree of common sense and intellect and credibility. Whereas you’re nothing more than a Mind Blowingly Stupid Fapwit (TM) who has betrayed the civility and patience that I’ve showed you throughout the thread by refusing to answer my questions and just invoking ultra-lame excuses as to why you can’t, thereby blowing your entire credibility out of the water.
Louis:
May 31st, 2012 at 7:00 am
Is Raj still going? He is truly the gift that keeps on giving.
And I am using “gift” in the German sense.
Louis
mikmik:
May 31st, 2012 at 7:01 am
Oh, I’d like to nominate jonmilne for a medal from raj.
Actually, raj, PZ always did like him best. jon always gets the biggest tankard of grog when we go digging for corpses, so maybe if you gave jonmilne that medal, it could go a long way towards proving your sincerity. Especially if it’s a big one made out of platinum and he gave little bits of it to me.
jonmilne:
May 31st, 2012 at 7:03 am
So what, pray tell, are you still doing in this thread? Seriously, you’ve been in the TZT threads since what, the 3rd one? And our exchanges started at sometime around TZT 7 right? And during that time you continually repeatedly posted posts where you insist that THIS TIME you’re leaving, only for you to return more or less within 24-48 hours of having done so. If you’re going to leave, or actually respond to stuff, then fucking well EITHER DO ONE OR THE OTHER. Either respond to all the posts including mine that have debunked your crap in full like someone with some intellectual honesty, or forget about your stupid “Well let’s see how Nerd responds first” bullshit and just STOP FUCKING POSTING YOU LAMEASS KARL PILKINGTON WANNABE! Failure to do either of those things just confirms your current status as a Mind Blowingly Stupid Fapwit (TM).
mikmik:
May 31st, 2012 at 7:08 am
Everything in this section always has to do with zombies and becoming undead, y’all ever notice that?
I’ll show raj how to show you what I mean:
rajkumar:
May 31st, 2012 at 7:28 am
Just before I go, still don’t believe you. Still don’t buy your crap. You are one grumpy old man.
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 31st, 2012 at 7:28 am
Good Question
rajkumar:
May 31st, 2012 at 7:30 am
And for this:
“Oh Rajy, please don’t leave us! No one else makes me bark with laughter like you do.”
It gets changed into:
“”Oh Rajy, please don’t leave us! No one else makes me bark like you do.”
I know. I have got a thing with dogs…
Louis:
May 31st, 2012 at 7:33 am
Jon Milne,
You do realise that by trolling you, Raj has just got you to reveal what appears to be relatively useful personal information, right?
It might all be bullshit, but, dude, if it isn’t…
…not smart.
Louis
Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:
May 31st, 2012 at 7:35 am
The only thing you love is yourself misogynist fuckwit. Your heart is full of shit.
You are saying you lost the rational argument, and must respond emotionally using your heart full of shit to being shown as the fuckwitted idjit you are.
rajkumar:
May 31st, 2012 at 7:42 am
At least, I don’t pretend to be a ‘gentleman’ who loves his wife so much that no other woman in the world holds any attraction for him … only to secretly masturbate twenty times a day, give or take, to cheap internet porn. Not to mention secret interactions with cheap hookers. You are truly the greatest defender of the feminist movement known to man.
Bye Nerdy
pentatomid:
May 31st, 2012 at 7:46 am
Jesus fucking christ, we need some type of banhammer here.
Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:
May 31st, 2012 at 7:57 am
Thanks for proving my point, oh useless, incompetent and incomprehensible one. You love yourself, and hate others who love and respect other people.
Oh, and no emotions are found in the heart except through faulty language, which idjits like you use. They all come from the brain. Any semi-educated person knows that. Which leaves you where??
FossilFishy (Lobed-finned Killer of Threads):
May 31st, 2012 at 8:19 am
Oh frabjoulous day! The one and only knower of all things, the definer of the undefinable, explainer of the unexpainable, and most exalted lover of canines noticed me! Little old me, with my self esteem issues and my pesky devotion to evidential standards. I’m trying to fix that, I am!
And with Raj to show the way, to lay before me his infinite understanding of all creation in that deep, moist, fecund way of his I’m sure that my salivation, er, I mean SALVATION is at hand. No longer will I have to settle for the crumbs that I must scrabble willy-nilly from beneath the lofty golden throne of the wisdom to which he so graciously, so noblely, has bestowed upon the undeserving hoard. No, now I shall receive the revelation, the veritable keys to the very quantum-foaminess really real reality, direct from the master’s own fingertips.
So please oh wise one, oh see-er of the unseeable, oh most perfect jokester-seeker-revealer, please show me the way…(dare I ask it…yes, yes, I must, I MUST, he’s leaving, seize the carp before it’s too late)…please I beg you, humble, upon blended knee and with plaintiff, perfect piety: how can I be more like you!?
Hurinomyces bruxellensis:
May 31st, 2012 at 9:14 am
So then I can’t imagine black holes, or radio waves, or neutrinos or the earth’s core, or a perfect circle, right? That’s interesting, because I’m pretty sure I actually can imagine all of those things, but according to you I shouldn’t be able to.
Your argument is something like if I were to assert that planes can’t fly, because they don’t have any strings attached to them, and then try to defend it by saying that you can’t lift a rock without picking it up or tying a string to it. Then when everyone objects to that stupid analogy by talking about magnets and gunpowder and all the other things that might move a rock against gravity, I would say “No, No, No, no science please, this is very simple; you can’t lift a rock without tying a string to it.”
One more time. Your assertion is false. Your analogy is stupid because it ignores everything about reality that you don’t like.
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
May 31st, 2012 at 9:21 am
raj:
There’s another problem with your analogy.
Could you describe to me the color darfigan? Pretty please?
jonmilne:
May 31st, 2012 at 10:43 am
On a non-Raj related note, how are people feeling now that Obama’s professed opinion about gay marriage seems to have swung public opinion in America towards legalisation of the practice?
On the one hand, I would certainly like to think that Obama knew that would happen if he spoke out, but I certainly still do think he could engaged in a tad more activism on the subject than he actually did.
Also, has anyone ever heard of the SCP Foundation? It’s a really cool website that’s set up like a super-secret agency that confiscates paranormal creatures and items. Check it out here: http://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/main and also check out the top rated pages here: http://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/top-rated-pages . I’m largely partial to the Keter-level articles, with SCPs 1000, 1983, 1322 and 231 being my favourites. That said, I also love 173, 294 and 2558-J too.
Amphiox:
May 31st, 2012 at 10:58 am
Another series of fappings from the fapwit.
Still no IP address to support its accusations of sockpuppetry.
Still no apologies for slandering.
Another series of admissions of LYING.
Amphiox:
May 31st, 2012 at 10:59 am
Another blatant lie by the fapwit. Someone “not trying to convince” would not still be here, fapping away.
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
May 31st, 2012 at 11:04 am
jonmilne:
Thanks. Thanks very much for what is going to be a serious time sink. Time I already procrastinate at work, as if I had a procrastination rock in a box in my office.
Thanks. Really.
Amphiox:
May 31st, 2012 at 11:11 am
Says the fapwit EVEN AFTER A PERSON WHO IS ACTUALLY red-green colour blind outright told him that was not true.
Pathetic lying fapwit.
WRONG. As can easily be seen in the link I previously provided, a red-green colour blind person can EASILY pick up green wavelengths of light. ALL THREE of the opsins that red-green colour blind people still have will detect green light. TWO of them even PEAK their sensitivity in green light.
In fact, based on those sensitivity curves, in all likelihood red-green colour blind people will perceive green shades as something very similar to what regular people do. It is RED that is the colour that will look very different from what regular people will see has red, and will instead look like shades of green and grey.
Amphiox:
May 31st, 2012 at 11:15 am
A serious accusation, fapwit, seeing as solicitation of prostitutes is a crime in most jurisdictions.
Provide EVIDENCE, admissible in a COURT OF LAW (as you have made a legal accusation), RIGHT NOW, or APOLOGIZE to NofR IMMEDIATELY.
Or admit, IMMEDIATELY, that you are an unethical slimewad who bears false witness against his neighbour for kicks.
Hurinomyces bruxellensis:
May 31st, 2012 at 11:37 am
Amphiox is exactly right about this statement.
You should apologize to Nerd. Unless you have something to back this accusation up with (which I’m sure you don’t) it is libel.
Be careful what you say about people. If you tell malicious lies about them they may have legal means to make you regret it.
Caine, Fleur du mal:
May 31st, 2012 at 11:40 am
It used to be believed that the liver was the seat of human emotion and the heart the seat of reason. This is the sort of crap humans come up with before they figure things out. Then, people figure things out and get a little bit right! Well, most people. You wouldn’t be one of them.
Oh, and this -> ♥ is not patterned after a human heart. It’s patterned after the shape of a woman’s ass when bent over. If you think about it for a couple of years, I’m sure you’ll get it.
Caine, Fleur du mal:
May 31st, 2012 at 11:43 am
Nigel:
Oh, why don’t we just go with Octarine? That one is easy.
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
May 31st, 2012 at 11:48 am
Caine:
Damn! I can’t believe I didn’t think of that. That’s way better.
/nigel hangs head in shame
Strewth:
May 31st, 2012 at 11:51 am
I may be mistaken here, but I seem to recall raj, in an earlier incarnation of this thread, admitting that the subjective experience of his hypothesized greater universal intelligence would be indistinguishable from a simple biologically driven hallucination.
He has also said that there would be no way to distinguish any deliberate actions of this supposed intelligence from the normal operations of the universe.
Oh right yes, the great parsimony shout-off. I remember now.
Then there was the whole bit about why do we call ourselves atheists when most of us accept a non-zero probability of a creator intelligence, and that we should instead call ourselves agnostics, which strikes me as some kind of poorly planned wedge strategy.
And now we have raj admitting that he doesn’t even read posts of any notable length, so that unless an argument can be made in the form of a Fox news sound bite, it is functionally invisible to him.
So to summarize (and to make my post longer and hence, only visible to the Illuminated Elite)- Raj would like us all to say we believe in a creator intelligence that will never have any meaningful impact on our lives or the course of history.
Which to me raises the question why?
Also: Fnord fnord fnord fnord
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
May 31st, 2012 at 12:01 pm
Also: Fnord fnord fnord fnord
indeed
Gnumann:
May 31st, 2012 at 1:12 pm
Oh shit – I can see the fnords
Amphiox:
May 31st, 2012 at 1:28 pm
A little OT, but I always liked the relative anatomic accuracy of the Chinese character for heart:
http://www.google.ca/search?q=chinese+word+for+heart&hl=en&prmd=imvns&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=n7fHT7WvMMjs2AXZzon-Cg&ved=0CGEQsAQ&biw=1726&bih=1005
Strewth:
May 31st, 2012 at 1:57 pm
@Gnumann – It’s how you know you’re part of the Atheiluminati. Or you were pining for them, one of the two.
A. R:
May 31st, 2012 at 2:18 pm
After weeks of research* I have discovered the source of the Misognraj’s seemingly infinite supplies of stupid. He’s using a subspace trasceiver network to extract the combined stupid of every fundie, wooist, and bigot on the planet and funnel it here. Obviously he’s metering the flow, but imagine what would happen if he didn’t… [shudder]
*(not really, I just came up with this shit)
Cal:
May 31st, 2012 at 2:42 pm
As a long time lurker, I think I may have puzzled out some of Raj’s comments about grumpy old men and multiple ego’s. He may actually think many of those commenting are PZ himself, and he at least thinks Jon is based on his comments # 268, 272, and 285.
Other than that, I get the impression that he once heard something from an authority figure about how explaining god was like explaining green to a colorblind person and either he was high or contemplating boobs at the time but was struck by the simple argument and is unsure how to proceed since he never thought about it and most people have or can think about it when presented with the questiony. In fact, a quick search in the Google machine links to pages of answers to how this could be done, with one link pointing here to TZT. As someone who grew up very religious and actually served a (Mormon) mission, I recall how hard it was to deal with people who would not stick to the script. That is the impression I get from Raj, that you have deviated so far from his script that you have completely lost him. His simple question has a simple answer and you will not play along.
chigau (違う):
May 31st, 2012 at 2:52 pm
A. R
That could explain the lack of originality.
A. R:
May 31st, 2012 at 2:59 pm
chigau: Exactly! For all we know, the misogyny outbursts are caused when the MRAs contributing to his stupid collective come through a bit strongly… I HAVE IT! Raj and the stupid people are like the Borg! The subspace network is actually a giant hive mind of stupidity.
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
May 31st, 2012 at 3:06 pm
Cal:
Excellent analysis. You should lurk less, and participate more. At least, in my opinion.
chigau (違う):
May 31st, 2012 at 3:10 pm
“My name is Legion, for we are many.”
Cal:
May 31st, 2012 at 3:19 pm
Point from Raj:
I meant to call BS on this statement as well. Because clearly every fantasy and SciFi novel I have ever read would have been impossible since these events or even events like them could not have been perceived with our senses. We imagine stuff all the time that does not exist in reality and we have history showing us that this has been happening for as long as we have data and art.
Strewth:
May 31st, 2012 at 3:41 pm
Cal @312 – I think you have a big piece of the puzzle there. If I had two internetz, I’d give you one.
Brownian:
May 31st, 2012 at 3:53 pm
Huh. So that’s why he thought I could ban him.
Christ, what a moron.
Ogvorbis:
May 31st, 2012 at 3:59 pm
This hypotheosis has been advanced before. Usually accompanied by accusations of hiveminditis.
Glad you could unlurk, Ca.
Cal:
May 31st, 2012 at 4:08 pm
Thanks! I hope to participate more and lurk less :)
Ogvorbis:
May 31st, 2012 at 4:11 pm
Crap. Sorry I murdered your ‘nym, Cal.
Maybe you could change it to something easier to spell? :)
cm's changeable moniker:
May 31st, 2012 at 4:22 pm
Cal @#317, quoting Raj:
Me too. I mean, I’ve never experienced beta decay, but I can imagine it. And I once had a job measuring it with a scintillometer, so I’m pretty sure it’s real.
Raj, if you’re reading? Beta decay. About your level (and not Wikipedia).
cm's changeable moniker:
May 31st, 2012 at 4:31 pm
Guy @#226:
Ah, gotcha. So you can perceive Jahweh and Allah, but when the pantheons of Norse and Greek gods start moshing they all look the same? ;-)
kemist, Dark Lord of the Sith:
May 31st, 2012 at 4:37 pm
Well, duh.
And therefore your god, huh ?
We’ve been telling you, with plenty of exemples, that this assertion pulled from your nether regions is completely false.
And anyway, even if there was any truth to it, it wouldn’t advance your god idea one bit since all those exemples you gave are fundamentally different from it : they concern things which we know, from solid evidence, exist outside of people’s heads.
When it’s evident to everybody with two functional brain cells where you’re driving to, why insist on taking everybody to the tourist trap on Mount Irrelevant ?
Caine, Meanypants OM:
May 31st, 2012 at 4:38 pm
Amphiox @ 309, nice.
Ichthyic:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:07 pm
I can agree with the ‘simplistic’ part of your comment, because ‘simplistic’ doesn’t mean flawed.
simple.
simplistic.
two different words.
thus endeth today’s lesson.
Ichthyic:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:10 pm
*reads Cal @ 312*
uh huh.
uh huh.
yup.
huh.
yeah, I think you have him wrapped up with a bow at this point.
rajkumar:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:10 pm
Kemist, you are all extremely lousy debaters, and far more lousy ‘scientists’.
Plus, there are a few more things that I have noted about most of you:
1)You sulk when you have nothing more to argue.
2)Some of you split yourselves into many alter egos in order to troll
3)Many of you attempt to glorify your puny selves with incredibly stupid boasts, nonsensical ravings, and other extremely stupid ego-inflating devices.
4)Most of you live under the delusion and illusion of being a real scientist, and this includes you, too.
Maybe I am wrong. But once you mind is made up about someone…? As you have made up your mind about me… Nothing can be done about it I guess. But in the end, who bloody cares about someone’s opinions?
Now, it is your turn to speak to your heart’s content. I am done here, in every sense of the expression.
Take Care
Have fun!
Ichthyic:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:12 pm
Kemist, you are all extremely lousy debaters, and far more lousy ‘scientists’.
thousands of posts, and you still haven’t figured out that what you think matters about as much as what my fish think.
amazing.
here, let me spell it out for you, again:
you’re stupid.
if you need further explanation, read # 312.
kemist, Dark Lord of the Sith:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:14 pm
Is anyone keeping a score of the flounces anymore ?
Louis:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:16 pm
I’m a lousy scientist?
Was that meant to offend me? Sweetie, you don’t even know what kind of scientist I am, let alone what kind of scientist I am. And even if you did, you’d have to get someone to help you with the long words.
{Claps hands}
New moron please!
Louis
Ichthyic:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:16 pm
Is anyone keeping a score of the flounces anymore ?
I threw my scorecard out days ago.
..and it was an 11×14 sized paper.
I think Raj has singlehandedly redefined “flounce”, or we have to come up with a different descriptor.
Ichthyic:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:18 pm
anyone bring the flamethrower? It’s time for fire instead of headshots.
as I stated ages ago, this thing isn’t a zombie.
some sort of ghoul or something?
A. R:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:21 pm
kemist: I lost track somewhere around 100.
kemist, Dark Lord of the Sith:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:26 pm
Flouncerific ?
Flounstastic ?
Ichthyic:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:27 pm
I think Raj has invented the …
Tigger Flounce.
Cal:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:28 pm
Since Raj has not experienced an actual flounce with his senses, he cannot imagine how to stick it…
Ichthyic:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:29 pm
lol
Louis:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:35 pm
Cal wins the internet. We may now all retire to tend our gardens and die in the rose bushes.
Louis
Tony:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:39 pm
I don’t know. Ghouls are rather cute. At least those on Scooby Doo were. Plus they were far more entertaining than Raj.
Caine, Meanypants OM:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:40 pm
Cal:
:snortle: +8
Lyn M, Purveyor of Fine Aphorisms of Death:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:40 pm
Do you suppose raj ever heard of the psychological concept of transference?
Hurinomyces bruxellensis:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:43 pm
Raj
Therefore God.
A. R:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:45 pm
Nope, it’s a Borg drone. And flamethrowers and headshots will do you no good, they adapt too quickly. You need a phaser rifle with a fre
A. R:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:46 pm
Nope, it’s a Borg drone. And flamethrowers and headshots will do you no good, they adapt too quickly. You need a phaser rifle with a frequency modulator chip (I think that’s what they called it).
Lyn M, Purveyor of Fine Aphorisms of Death:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:46 pm
Perhaps raj has given us a clue as to what he does:
sulk out? Some combination of sulk and flounce? sounce?
Louis:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:47 pm
Lyn M,
If he has, he’ll call it a bad scientist, accuse it of sock puppetry, ask how it communicated before wikipedia and the stare at its tits until he sees god.
Louis
P.S. I think the only philosophical question Raj has genuinely answered beyond reasonable doubt is “what is the sound of one mind fapping?”.
A. R:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:49 pm
Louis : You forgot that he’ll probably try to get it to explain green.
Lyn M, Purveyor of Fine Aphorisms of Death:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:49 pm
@ AR
Yep. Sort of a Hedy Lamarr phaser, which raj would immediately say proves god.
Louis:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:49 pm
Good point good point.
Louis
Lyn M, Purveyor of Fine Aphorisms of Death:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:51 pm
@ Louis
Good point. And then he’ll change the subject and announce everyone is a grumpy old man.
cm's changeable moniker:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:51 pm
Flulk.
chigau (違う):
May 31st, 2012 at 5:54 pm
Which ones of you are the sockpuppets?
Tony:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:55 pm
Ichthyic:
thanks ever so much for that! Between my roommate and I, we just listened to that sing a long as well as two from The Little Mermaid (I can’t believe I still remember many of the lyrics to “Under the Sea” and “Part of that world”).
Louis:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:59 pm
Chigau,
I have enough trouble just being me. I haven’t the time or energy to be someone else! ;-)
Louis
Lyn M, Purveyor of Fine Aphorisms of Death:
May 31st, 2012 at 5:59 pm
Well, this was a slice, but have to go to work.
On the flounce, how about a gigaflounce? It will scale up, too.
Ichthyic:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:01 pm
Which ones of you are the sockpuppets?
I AM SPARTACUS!
Ichthyic:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:03 pm
You need a phaser rifle with a frequency modulator chip (I think that’s what they called it).
no, they adjust to that too.
don’t we have to kill the queen or something?
Ichthyic:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:04 pm
…and on her birthday, too.
*sigh*
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen%27s_Official_Birthday
Ichthyic:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:07 pm
We may now all retire to tend our gardens and die in the rose bushes.
but… all I have going right now is an herb garden…
with nightshade and hemlock as weeds*.
*no kidding, my inlaws were rather in a tizzy about it when they stopped by last wknd.
antigodless:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:13 pm
@ chigau (違う)
You have very few words, but bring some focus and encouragement in them. You take a great interest in a range of topics. I am interested from which cultural heritage are you from? I can’t tell between Japanese, Korean, or Chinese. I am Interested in worldviews (I am married to an Indonesian), but would love to hear a little of your story one day? Maybe share your story?
cm's changeable moniker:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:17 pm
Oh, for goodness sake, if you’re going to kill the queen, at least do it properly:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnTR-cG5W1I
.
Ichthyic:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:18 pm
antigodless is in the zombie pen.
quick! close the gate!
Caine, Meanypants OM:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:25 pm
Chigau, antigodless is attempting to lead you down the thorny stones to yak your ear off about gods. Don’t go! We’ll be bored silly.
A. R:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:25 pm
Ichthyic: I’m not sure, but I think a few photon torpedoes would do the job. (Also, your herb garden concerns me.)
Louis: Hmm, but which roses? And in which bed?
Cal:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:27 pm
I know I am a late to the game, but can anyone point me to the end of the queue for Brownian?
A. R:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:30 pm
Cal: It’s near the door to TET. If you want, you can always join Teh Transdimensional Groop Secks With Louis singularity. Entrance is in the broom closet above the stairs to the dungeon.
Ichthyic:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:33 pm
Don’t go! We’ll be bored silly.
no, GO!
we need the distraction until fearless leader returns to close the gate on it.
Ichthyic:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:34 pm
You have very few words, but bring some focus and encouragement in them.
moron translation
Cal:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:35 pm
Thank you A. R I always enjoy a good singularity.
Ichthyic:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:36 pm
I always enjoy a good singularity.
yes, they do tend to attract, don’t they?
myeck waters:
May 31st, 2012 at 6:44 pm
Oh good, antigoodness is here. I do love me some witnessing. By which I mean witnessing their idiotic attempts at debate.
Amphiox:
May 31st, 2012 at 7:06 pm
Still slandering us with the sickpuppetry accusation, are you, fapwit?
Every computer connects to the Internet with a unique IP Address, fapwit. If anyone creates alter egos, this is instantly obvious, with multiple pseudonyms all using the same IP address. The IP addresses are ALL visible to PZ, and he INSTANTLY banhammers sockpuppets.
So back up your accusations with IP Addresses linked to pseudonyms IMMEDIATELY, or apologize for slandering us.
Amphiox:
May 31st, 2012 at 7:18 pm
Our opinion of you, fapwit, is continuously formed from the posts you make. Mine has changed CONSTANTLY. It continues to get lower and lower, which each new fap from you.
I will change it back in the other direction when you CHANGE YOUR BEHAVIOR, APOLOGIZE for your slanders and other jerkasseries, and RETRACT every single one of your many, many shameless lies.
cm's changeable moniker:
May 31st, 2012 at 8:09 pm
Amphiox:
*ahem*
Every device connected to a network has a (probabilistically) unique MAC address, it’s true, but, given NAT, not a unique IP address.
–
(BTW, I think you’ve probably flogged the “rajkumar says I’m a sockpuppet, therefore slander” dead horse enough already.
The parsimonious explanation is that he doesn’t understand “sockpuppet”. The slightly-less-parsimonious explanation is that he thinks you’re all PZ.
And it would be libel anyway, not slander.)
Menyambal --- Sambal's sockpuppet:
May 31st, 2012 at 8:36 pm
Doesn’t understand “sockpuppet”?
He may not use the term, but he’s long been harping on the idea that most of us are pretending to be something we aren’t–ersatz scientists, at least.
Recently, he’s really hit the concept that some folks are logged in with false identities–what most of us call “sockpuppeting”.
Of course, if he did call it “sockpuppeting”, he’d probably define it as some other damn thing.
kemist, Dark Lord of the Sith:
May 31st, 2012 at 9:06 pm
I don’t mind, if I can get googly eyes to see my illusory PhD.
Amphiox:
May 31st, 2012 at 9:17 pm
He’s been using the term “alter egos”, in the plural.
From the raj:
He understands it better than he understands red-green colourblindness, at any rate.
chigau (違う):
May 31st, 2012 at 9:18 pm
Caine
Way back @39 Louis said that it’s my turn to play nice with a troll.
I don’t think I have a choice.
Louis wouldn’t lie to me.
Would he?
Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:
May 31st, 2012 at 9:18 pm
True debate would mean the AGL (AIDL) could be wrong. I’ve never met a godbot/creobot who could be wrong. So AIDL preaches, but cannot debate….Whereas real and conclusive physical evidence stands a chance of changing many atheists minds. But the level of evidence required, equivalent to the eternally burning bush, appears well beyond what the delusional godbots can offer. Which is a picture of imaginary jebus in shower mold…
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
May 31st, 2012 at 9:23 pm
rajkumar:
Again, you present a lot of assertions, with no evidence to back them up.
Do you seriously think the whole, “You can’t imagine something you’ve not personally experienced” line of reasoning had any real merit? I mean, especially after we pretty much trounced it with, y’know, evidence. And examples. Many, many examples.
Now it’d be nice if you’d present examples backing up all your assertions about our collective character. Because really, all it looks like from this end of the conversation is a case of hurt feelings.
chigau (違う):
May 31st, 2012 at 9:28 pm
Besides
is irresistible and
.
is intriguing (identified spouse’s ethnicity but not own ethnicity.)
Lyn M, Purveyor of Fine Aphorisms of Death:
May 31st, 2012 at 9:29 pm
@ amphiox
Like that’s hard.
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
May 31st, 2012 at 9:42 pm
raj:
I’m kinda curious where you were going with the whole, “If you can’t experience it, you can’t imagine it” line of reasoning. Were you going to suggest that, since we can imagine God, we must have truly experienced God, and God must exist?
(Yeah, I’m assuming raj can’t stick to the flounce.)
Amphiox:
May 31st, 2012 at 9:48 pm
Small steps.
Very small steps.
Lyn M, Purveyor of Fine Aphorisms of Death:
May 31st, 2012 at 9:52 pm
@ Amphiox 386
But … but I thought you can’t get smaller divisions than Planck’s constant permits.
Snoof:
May 31st, 2012 at 10:07 pm
@ nigelTheBold
No, it’s even stupider than that.
It’s “you haven’t experienced God, therefore you can’t imagine it, therefore you can’t define it, therefore you can’t argue against it as a proposition”.
That is, assuming rajkumar sticks to previous arguments.
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
May 31st, 2012 at 10:21 pm
Snoof:
Oh, fuck me running. Is that really what this was about? I mean, I have to admit, I’ve been skimming this thread, as I’ve been too busy for words these last few weeks. I’ve read as much of raj’s stuff as I could stomach, and saw some stuff defending his definition of God (even denying he defined or described God, when in fact he had, just not formally).
But really. If that’s the line of thought raj was pursuing, my opinion of xes intellect just plummeted. And it’s not like it was perched atop a tall cliff to begin with. Your summation of the argument dug a hole, climbed back out, and pushed my opinion in.
Menyambal --- Sambal's sockpuppet:
May 31st, 2012 at 11:07 pm
Raj says, “You can’t imagine something you’ve not personally experienced.”
I say he’s imagining something he’s not personally experienced, namely everything he thinks we are doing, feeling and pretending to be.
Ichthyic:
May 31st, 2012 at 11:59 pm
I don’t think I have a choice.
Louis wouldn’t lie to me.
Would he?
is that a haiku?
Ichthyic:
June 1st, 2012 at 12:01 am
Of course, if he did call it “sockpuppeting”, he’d probably define it as some other damn thing.
probably involving a literal sock.
theophontes 坏蛋:
June 1st, 2012 at 1:27 am
I must confess that I cannot sockpuppet for physiological reasons. A picture of my attempt. WYSIWYG.
@ chigau (違う)
*cough*
Did I ever tell you about my experiences witnessing in China?
John Morales:
June 1st, 2012 at 4:36 am
[meta]
Cal, you landed a 10 in your delurkance.
(Fairly awesome)
–
The value of TZT now includes dividends!
'Tis Himself:
June 1st, 2012 at 5:18 am
That’s a reasonable assumption based on past performance.
Ogvorbis:
June 1st, 2012 at 8:42 am
Pogoing?
Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:
June 1st, 2012 at 8:46 am
He must not read science-fiction/fantasy. A whole genre of literature refutes his sorry thinking.
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
June 1st, 2012 at 8:48 am
PZ, I suggest a picture of a zombie sockpuppet for the next incarnation of this thread (assuming such a picture exists, and further assuming this thread is granted a new incarnation).
Ogvorbis:
June 1st, 2012 at 8:49 am
Which exchange is it listed on and what is the abreviation?
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
June 1st, 2012 at 8:49 am
Ogvorbis:
Oscilloflounce?
Ogvorbis:
June 1st, 2012 at 8:54 am
Schrödinger’s Flounce?
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
June 1st, 2012 at 8:56 am
You win.
Cal:
June 1st, 2012 at 1:23 pm
I have to concede my newly won internet to you Ogvorbis because that was awesome… :)
Amphiox:
June 1st, 2012 at 1:45 pm
Lyn @387;
Planck’s constant only applies to this, physical reality. The raj inhabits a different kind of universe, where all things are possible (but unimaginable).
And indeed, the sub-planck capacity for intellectual growth MUST be the case, for it is the dynamic opposite that balances the fulcrum of the raj’s existence, the yin to the yang of the boundless infinity of its incompetence and dishonesty.
Amphiox:
June 1st, 2012 at 1:48 pm
Are TZT dividends taxed at corporate or individual rates?
Phalacrocorax, aus der Dritte Welt:
June 1st, 2012 at 1:54 pm
This started as a reconstitution of antigodless’s flowchart of the creation, but it too rapidly became excessively bloated, silly and unflowchartlike for a “Why I am an atheist” thread. So I’m just going to toss it here instead and let the grues eat it.
Sorry for the inconvenience.
—-
THE LEGEND OF GOD’S MYSTERY MAGIC ADVENTURE QUEST
(120% BIBLICALLY ACCURATE!)
Pilot Episode: Bere’s shit
(John 1:1-2) It is very dark in here, for some strange meanings of “here.” God hardly can see anything. Yet he finds within himself a sniny something called The Word.
(John 1:3) God examines The Word and figures out that it can be used to create things.
(Gen 1:1) God uses The Word to create the Heavens and the Earth. It is still not clear what those concepts mean.
(Gen 1:2) God tries to inspect his creation, but it is still dark all around. His toes touch something moist and cold underneath him. Oops… Perhaps he created Water instead of the Earth after all.
(Gen 1:3) God discovers he is capable of speaking. That’s funny, as there was nobody around he could talk to. Or was there? He couldn’t really recall… Anyway, God orders The Word to create Photons. His command is promptly obeyed.
(Gen 1:4-5) God is pleased, but he sees that it is too bright now. To solve the problem, he orders light and darkness to alternate. It was not the best solution for the problem, but it would work for the moment.
(Gen 1:6-7) With the new light, God inspects his environment. As he suspected, it was full of water where there should be the Earth. God wonders how its molecules could hold together before there were photons to intermediate the electromagnetic force, but decides to shrug this mystery off till later. There were more pressing problems now. For example, the Heavens looked awfully empty. Seeing nothing around to fill them with, God decides to put some of the water up there. With all the power of his omnipotence, God kicks a good bunch of water into the skies, roaring while he does it.
(Gen 1:8) Whoa! That was fun! Time really flies when you engage in pointless violence.
(Gen 1:9) After making sure the Heavens wouldn’t fall back on his head, God looks at the waters beneath. They surely don’t seem as scary now as they had before. Actually, God can even sense there’s something big and flat at their bottom. After a better look, he sees that it is the Earth! The Earth was under the water all this time! God takes a brief moment to consider if The Word may be malfunctioning, what with creating empty heavens and unwarranted layers concealing the ground, but, presently, he orders the waters to step aside.
(Gen 1:10) Seeing the new dry ground makes God so happy that he decides to name it “land.” He feels rather silly, as there’s clearly no one around for him to communicate. Nevertheless, he decides to spare a portion of the water in a corner (it may come handy later) and to call it “sea”.
(Gen 1:11-12) The “land” certainly looked like a great play field, so God decides to use it to experiment with The Word. He gets distracted creating lots of different organisms on it, but then suddenly…
(Gen 1:13) everything goes dark!
(Gen 1:14-15) God notices the lights are still going on and off, as he had not ordered them to stop. As soon as the next morning breaks, he notices the photons are not coming from any direction in particular. To fix their odd behavior, he re-arranges them in two shiny lumps and a series of little spots to keep things visible even when it was night. It was not a perfect solution, he admitted, but at least it was better than before.
(Gen 1:16-18) As the land was already too crowded with plants, God placed his new lights in the sky. Surprisingly, they didn’t sink in the waters of the Heavens, just floated around.
(Gen 1:19) God decides that it was a good thing if the lights continued to alternate, so he wouldn’t lose track of time. Of course, he did not remember creating time in the first place, but as it was already here there was no point in ignoring it.
(Gen 1:20-21) Seeing that the air and the seas were now too empty in comparison with the Heavens and the Earth, God proceeds to use The Word to fill them with creatures.
(Gen 1:22-23) God is so pleased with his new feathered and scaly friends that he hugs every single one of them.
(Gen 1:24-25) Looking back at the land, he decides that plants were boring and not such a good idea in the first place, and starts to fill it with land animals. He rejoices on his new furry friends and hugs them as well.
(Gen 1:26-27) Upon realizing that he had to have arms to hug everybody, God examines himself. Even though he didn’t recall creating his body either, he notices that he is one good-looking fellow. It was a shame that there weren’t any more things like him. With a command of “Let us make mankind in our image”, The Word creates a gazillion new human beings. They weren’t exact replicas of him, but they were good enough for God. Mankind questions him about what he meant by “us”, but God simply shrugs off. He was not sure, but it sounded appropriate at the moment.
(Gen 1:28-31) Mankind shrug, too. They look around and see all this happy plants and animals. They tell God that they surely look tasty and ask what they should do with them. God replies that they can rip, burn and kill them if they liked, as he could always make more with The Word. The animals are not pleased.
(Gen 2:1-2) Satisfied, God concludes that his creation of the Heavens and the Earth, whatever it was meant by such words, is complete. Only then did he notice how tiresome this whole ordeal has been. He retreats into his holy bed, not noticing how strange it was that an all-powerful being required rest.
(Gen 2:3) Unable to sleep with all the noise humans were doing while throwing their wild party of slaughter and havoc, God orders all of them to take a break and be quiet till next day. They grudgingly abide. Satisfied, God closes his eyes and has sweet dreams…
. . .
(Gen 2:4-5) It is very dark in here. Hardly anything can be seen. God opens his eyelids only to find barren land stretching in all directions. God blinks and rubs his eyes. He can’t believe it, but part of his creation is gone. Where is the sea, the plants, the animals and the humans? Was all that a hallucination? Or perhaps a dream? He inspects his pockets and finds a new item shoved into one of them. It is a card written in crayon. It reads “Hello! My name is YHWH.” God looks desperately over his shoulders for who could have left this message, but there´s obviously nobody in sight. He takes a deep breath and tries to calm himself down. Perhaps his name was YHWH all the time, and he merely left a message for himself. Of course, he knew he’d forget it and left himself a note. It was a reasonable explanation.
(Gen 2:6) God looks around again and notices this time the ground is rather soaked. He decides to leave all this creation business behind, as he was not sure what happened with his previous creatures. Perhaps excessive use had depleted the power of The Word. Perhaps The Word was evil. He doesn’t care anymore and instead sits on the mud and starts playing with it. Yay, that is fun!
(Gen 2:7) With the mud, God makes a replica of one of the humans he thought he had created before. It was much more fun to create clay creatures than real ones, he thought. They couldn’t possibly do anything annoying such as noisy parties or outright bizarre such as mysteriously disappearing. However, there seems to be something odd about this statue. God leans closer to its eyes. God blinks. The clay man blinks back, saying “hi.” God screams in terror.
… Behind a nearby rock, a slim reptilian creature operates a radio. “Our plan is working, Tezcatlipoca. He thinks he’s the only god and that he created the universe. Now it’s time to release the real weird stuff.”
And so the Bible was written. Amen.
myeck waters:
June 1st, 2012 at 5:42 pm
It was better in the original Klingon.
chigau (違う):
June 1st, 2012 at 6:00 pm
myeck waters
Indeed.
link
Weed Monkey:
June 1st, 2012 at 6:06 pm
Zombie garden gnomes
Phalacrocorax, aus der Dritte Welt:
June 1st, 2012 at 6:36 pm
That was Klingon? Damn, Google translate said it was Arapaho and I believed it.
John Morales:
June 2nd, 2012 at 12:45 am
Phalacrocorax, a most excellent exegesis there.
(Take a bow)
Ichthyic:
June 2nd, 2012 at 6:20 pm
is it… is it dead?
John Morales:
June 2nd, 2012 at 6:23 pm
I could poke it, if ya want.
Ichthyic:
June 2nd, 2012 at 6:27 pm
*hands John a stick*
chigau (違う):
June 2nd, 2012 at 6:35 pm
It’s resting.
Ichthyic:
June 2nd, 2012 at 6:38 pm
no, no, it’s pinin’
John Morales:
June 2nd, 2012 at 6:47 pm
<pokes>
Hey, Rajawretched:
By the power I have over you, I demand you cringe abjectly and abstain from any method of masturbation whatsoever until sunset arrives*.
–
* Yes, your local sunset!
cm's changeable moniker:
June 2nd, 2012 at 7:38 pm
I say put 40,000 volts through it and see what happens.
chigau (違う):
June 2nd, 2012 at 8:26 pm
Where’s the godbot?
I’m ready.
John Morales:
June 2nd, 2012 at 9:01 pm
chigau, you doubt my power?!
(I evinced unto it my desire for it to stop masturbating for a time, and it’s obediently complying. After sunset, we’ll see…)
chigau (違う):
June 2nd, 2012 at 9:08 pm
John Morales
Not the old used-up raj.
The antigodless one from the other thread.
It spoke to me here at #362.
I await another manifestation.
Ichthyic:
June 2nd, 2012 at 9:11 pm
I say put 40,000 volts through it and see what happens.
voom!
theophontes (坏蛋):
June 2nd, 2012 at 11:23 pm
@ Ichthyic
Pinin’ for the fjords?
John Morales:
June 2nd, 2012 at 11:29 pm
chigau, heh.
(I’m using Admiral Nelson’s telescope method, in a broad sense. ;) )
–
But yes, looks like my poking is eliciting no response.
John Morales:
June 2nd, 2012 at 11:30 pm
PS But then, the ostensible purpose might not be the actual one, eh?
Lyn M, Purveyor of Fine Aphorisms of Death:
June 3rd, 2012 at 2:44 am
@ Amphiox #404
Ooooookay. I guess you have made your point. I accept the sub-Planck steps in rajfapspace.
So it’s going to take awhile before we can actually see the step, no?
Amphiox:
June 3rd, 2012 at 2:50 am
It is something that can only be imagined.
John Morales:
June 3rd, 2012 at 3:14 am
I note that the crepuscule has advanced into nightfall and beyond, in certain longitudes.
(Let no-one doubt my power over the specimen)
pentatomid:
June 3rd, 2012 at 4:13 am
nigelTheBold,
Why of course such a thing exists:
http://www.thezombienation.com/2010/11/22/cracking-open-the-sketchbook-zombie-sock-puppet/
Ichthyic:
June 3rd, 2012 at 4:45 am
Pinin’ for the fjords?
of course!
beautiful plumage the misoraj has, eh?
theophontes (坏蛋):
June 3rd, 2012 at 5:58 am
@ Ichthyic
If it was not nailed to its perch… Oh wait! That’s not , that’s
theophontes (坏蛋):
June 3rd, 2012 at 7:37 am
@ pentatomid
Late you are: This sub-thread.
cm's changeable moniker:
June 3rd, 2012 at 1:52 pm
Interesting. Not the result I expected.
*makes note in lab book*
A. R:
June 3rd, 2012 at 4:18 pm
Hmm, it would appear the Raj’s link with the collective has been temporarily broken, given the lack of incredulous stupidity on the thread recently.
kemist, Dark Lord of the Sith:
June 3rd, 2012 at 6:53 pm
I say let’s keep testing till we run out of cake.
But there’s no sense crying
Over every mistake.
You just keep on trying
Till you run out of cake.
And the science gets done.
And you make a neat gun
For the people who are
Still alive.
cm's changeable moniker:
June 3rd, 2012 at 8:42 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RthZgszykLs
Because it hasn’t been linked enough ….
chigau (違う):
June 4th, 2012 at 12:30 pm
Want to talk about something not food?
Anri:
June 4th, 2012 at 4:09 pm
Can it be Starflouncing, like Starfarting?
Or is more freakout required?
Caine, Fleur du mal:
June 4th, 2012 at 6:26 pm
Hey, Chigau. The weather here finally warmed up and the sun is out, it’s summer! I sat in the sun for a bit today, now I’m trying to be a good needle slave and get some work done. Would it be bad if I asked how your tomatoes are doing?
chigau (違う):
June 4th, 2012 at 6:43 pm
Caine
Thanks for the reminder, I haven’t watered today.
Tomatoes are OK, just a bit slow.
Haven’t planted potatoes yet. It may be too late.
A. R:
June 4th, 2012 at 10:35 pm
chigau: That would depend on the variety (i.e. maincrop or early). I got mine in about a week after Jeebus on a stick day.
theophontes (坏蛋):
June 4th, 2012 at 11:05 pm
I left my plants in over the winter. It never gets cold enough here for them to die completely. But aside from the spearmint, they are not very happy plants. In fact the mint is quite miserable. The chilli plant was murdered by a rodent last season and its pot has been overgrown by weeds.
*sniff*
theophontes (坏蛋):
June 4th, 2012 at 11:06 pm
{theophontes brightens up}
I haz zombieplants!!!
John Morales:
June 4th, 2012 at 11:16 pm
I remember when the Rajamuffin first appeared, all puffed-up posturing and feisty braggadocio.
(Need MOAR specimens)
theophontes (坏蛋):
June 4th, 2012 at 11:57 pm
@ John
Yeah, his vacuous arguments dried up and he degenerated into a common or garden troll.
We could try advertising…
mikmik:
June 5th, 2012 at 8:46 am
@ mein Schurke (#443), sie hazen undead re-dead afterlife!
cm's changeable moniker:
June 5th, 2012 at 10:49 am
Re. trolls, illithid is still twitching over here.
Illuminata, Genie in the Beer Bottle:
June 5th, 2012 at 11:17 am
Me too!
I didn’t know y’all were talking BEER over here! There’s nothing on earth more interesting to talk about than BEER!
theophontes (坏蛋):
June 5th, 2012 at 11:23 am
re: zombieplants
Linky.
(The interesting part is that the video was shot in Tardiville, the state capitol of TZT.)
Gnumann:
June 5th, 2012 at 11:26 am
Yuck! Do we have a definite on wheter it’s hyperon or not yet?
cm's changeable moniker:
June 5th, 2012 at 11:35 am
Crossing over from TFT, @David M:
I have my own abstract written. Would be interesting to compare.
theophontes (坏蛋):
June 5th, 2012 at 11:52 am
@ Illuminata
Needs to be opened.
@ cm
Aaah, zombie strawmen? Our neverdead farm is coming together beautifully.
David Marjanović:
June 5th, 2012 at 12:15 pm
Heh.
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
June 5th, 2012 at 12:21 pm
tzt is creepin
Aratina Cage:
June 5th, 2012 at 12:31 pm
…me out.
Louis:
June 5th, 2012 at 12:35 pm
Since this is now the Official Meen™ Thread and TET is fluffy and contains pillows:
Fuck everything and everyone.
That is all.
Love
Louis
Aratina Cage:
June 5th, 2012 at 12:39 pm
Dearheart Louis,
I’ll pray for you.
Jesus lurvs you!
–Aratina
Louis:
June 5th, 2012 at 12:56 pm
Aratina,
I See What You Did There™.
Goood. Gooooooood.
Louis
Antiochus Epiphanes:
June 5th, 2012 at 1:13 pm
1. Fie on all of you.
2. I never felt safe posting my favorite recipes in TET, because they are not good. However, the now-broadened and by-the-dumpster-next-to-the-grease-trap vibe of TZT seems an appropriate venue for discussing one of my favorite lunch recipes.
Egg Salad Burrito
a. Place a plain flour tortilla on really more plastic wrap then you need. Decide that this is wasteful, and try to use the serrated edge of the plastic wrap box to sever, like, one third of the plastic wrap that you have already dispensed. Do not for a second consider what use the severed third will be to anyone.
b. Fucking that up, you will now have one piece of plastic wrap that is too small to be good for anything and one that is so stretched, that you doubt its integrity. Go back to step “a”, and repeat the process until your guilt at wasting plastic wrap is not so strong as your rage at failing even the simplest fucking task. Then move on to step “c”.
c. Ok. Now, I hope someone in your house has made hard-boiled eggs because if not you are shit out of luck. Peel one hard-boiled egg, being sure to tear off a good quarter of the egg-white with the shell, exposing the greenish yoke. Maybe the yolk looks disgusting now, but we’ll fix that in step “d”. Remove exactly as much of the shell from the largest intact piece as you are completely unwilling to ingest.
d. Place the decroded shell-free-ish egg on the burrito and mash the shit out of it with a fork. Then mash in some pickle relish* and a squirt of mayonnaise. Dress with exactly as much hot sauce is required to either hide the greenish yolk-tinge or at least make it look festive. Oh, yeah. Add lots of salt and pepper.
e. Fail to wrap the tortilla around the mess you made of it so that the egg salad squirts out the top and sides. Bonus if you can manage to fold the tortilla so that it splits, allowing egg salad to sort of spread disgustingly on the plastic wrap below it.
f. Do your best to wrap this clusterfuck that you made for lunch with the plastic wrap, but don’t count on it holding, because like some kind of cheap asshole, you always buy the cheapest, shittiest plastic wrap on the planet.
g. Reproach yourself for even bothering. Don’t plan to eat lunch with anyone, unless you want a lot of comments about how sub-par your lunch is.
*I prefer dill-pickle relish with everything.
Aratina Cage:
June 5th, 2012 at 1:28 pm
@Louis
Horrible idea. Considering all Teh Zombies lumbering about, I think the correct answer is that the foot is gamey. ;)
@Antiochus Epiphanes
It’s funny because it’s true. But what good is a mouthwatering recipe like yours doing on TZT without a good long squirt of catsup on top?
Antiochus Epiphanes:
June 5th, 2012 at 1:37 pm
*growls*
ketchup!
But you are completely correct. It goes good with just about anything. I was saving up this masterpiece, but here goes.
Cold Hot-dog with Warm Ketchup
a. Garnish an uncooked hotdog with ketchup from packets in the junk drawer.
consciousness razor:
June 5th, 2012 at 1:58 pm
Antiochus, TZT isn’t the appropriate place for posting recipes, unless they include lots of brains. Maybe the Food Network’s website would accept your submissions if you told them you are the Seleucid king.
chigau (違う):
June 5th, 2012 at 2:04 pm
We can post recipes here.
Baked Beans
open tin of beans
eat
(spoon optional)
consciousness razor:
June 5th, 2012 at 2:09 pm
You get the ones with hunks of brains in them, right? Hard to find a good brand. Most of them never put very many in there.
chigau (違う):
June 5th, 2012 at 2:17 pm
They usually have a chunk of whiteish something.
Is that the brainz?
Antiochus Epiphanes:
June 5th, 2012 at 2:19 pm
CR:
Fair enough.
Let’s replace this:
with this
————————————-
My naïf: I first employed that strategy more than 12 years ago. They quickly went from snide little “Thanks for your submission, but unfortunately…” type form letters to a general restraining order. And cancellation of my subscription to their magazine, reactionary snobs. The Seleucids haven’t had much respect since the whole “Roman Conquest” debacle.
consciousness razor:
June 5th, 2012 at 2:33 pm
Thank you, Antiochus. I can accept that substitution. Seems like a lot of prep work in steps a.-f., but I’ll have to try it out.
Sorry, I didn’t realize. What fuckers. Don’t despair, though. I’m sure one of these days, the Seleucids will back and better than ever. Then Food Network can be razed to the ground.
cm's changeable moniker:
June 5th, 2012 at 2:33 pm
David M, it’s only in my head, so if you were serious, don’t go all, you know, thorough or anything!
(For the record, ChasCP would have supplied the title and the “question we set out to explore”. The rest would just be context, evidence, or exegesis.)
Aratina Cage:
June 5th, 2012 at 2:41 pm
I can’t wait to hear where ChasCP falls on the catsup←→ketchup divide. Catsup: it’s what’s for innards.
cm's changeable moniker:
June 5th, 2012 at 2:42 pm
AE:
All bad food requires a glass of self-loathing to wash it down!
mikmik:
June 5th, 2012 at 5:11 pm
consciousness razor
Y’know, it was Britain creating all the fuss in March of 1996 that we had to stop including brains in our processed meat. Now, our wieners don’t have any nutritional value at all!
That’s why I buy the chicken hot dogs exclusively – they taste worse, and they might have some nutrition in them.
Antiochus Epiphanes
I can never remember, is that called the curds or the whey?
Ichthyic:
June 5th, 2012 at 5:13 pm
Any sign of anti-gormless yet?
*preps zombie torture tools*
A. R:
June 5th, 2012 at 5:26 pm
Ichthyic: If you want, I think I still have a few industrial grade log scale irony meters in one of the cargo bays of the LOLstar. There might be a godbot poker in there too.
Ichthyic:
June 5th, 2012 at 5:30 pm
There might be a godbot poker in there too.
yeah, mine’s kinda dull from overuse, come to think of it.
*looks askance*
how much?
Ichthyic:
June 5th, 2012 at 5:34 pm
btw, I studied my creo-zombie torture techniques while living with the Huron.
here’s a sampler:
http://books.google.co.nz/books?id=ng4WAQAAIAAJ&q=torture#search_anchor
A. R:
June 5th, 2012 at 5:40 pm
Ichthyic: That depends on how many I have. I’ll look… {A. R beams up to LOLstar [don't you judge me for mixing my SciFi up), comes back with a giant crate of godbot pokers, and crates of irony meters and stupid shields.] Looks like I stocked up when Danielhaven was here, come and get them everyone, they’re free! Don’t forget to take a stupid shield and a log scale irony meter, you never know what levels of stupid a godbot can unleash when poked enough, and I don’t want injuries from parts flying off of exploding standard issue irony meters.
Ichthyic:
June 5th, 2012 at 5:46 pm
free
hmm
*looks suspicious*
there is no free lunch.
A. R:
June 5th, 2012 at 5:58 pm
Ichthyic: If it’ll make you feel better, I’ll take 100 bars of gold-pressed latinum for the lot. Or you can help me annihilate the godbot.
Phalacrocorax, aus der Dritte Welt:
June 5th, 2012 at 6:29 pm
I think The Zombie Thread should be unified with The Illithid Thread to keep all the creepy fantasy creatures in the same place.
consciousness razor:
June 5th, 2012 at 6:31 pm
*picks up a poker, ♣s teh stupid*
Still works.
Reload this page over the next few hours to see the transit of Venus.
consciousness razor:
June 5th, 2012 at 6:37 pm
If you zoom in on it a lot, it looks like you can even see a little distortion from Venus’ atmosphere, but I don’t know. That might just be an artifact from the camera.
Antiochus Epiphanes:
June 5th, 2012 at 7:04 pm
Aratina, 469:
I’m willing to wager adventurously on teh “ketchup” side.
Ye Olde Blacksmith - in bed with absolute evil and a Spocktopus!:
June 5th, 2012 at 8:35 pm
Oh bother, ya’ll broke all of the toys. :(
Ye Olde Blacksmith - in bed with absolute evil and a Spocktopus!:
June 5th, 2012 at 8:37 pm
Oh wait. New rules, right? Well then, piss on all y’all!
nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:
June 5th, 2012 at 8:51 pm
nigel swoops in, and sonorously orates thusly:
Now is the winter of our discontent, made glorious summer by this sun of… Hey! Egg salad burritos! Why, yes I shall.
By the by, what have y’all done with the trolls? Except for the cedarbrained illithid misogynistically spouting drivel on some stale thread, it seems quiet around these parts.
…York. And then something about clouds.
Ichthyic:
June 5th, 2012 at 8:56 pm
By the by, what have y’all done with the trolls?
well, PZ was SUPPOSED to be minding the gates, but he took off for some fictional place called “iceland” (yeah, as if there’s someplace made of ice phhht), and left the damn gate open.
they escaped.
Aratina Cage:
June 5th, 2012 at 9:20 pm
@Antiochus Epiphanes
What’s important is whether catsup or ketchup was applied first to tomato ketchup. :D (That’s the only way forward for catsup I fear, because I think you are probably right about that.) I prefer catsup for TZT because it reminds me of the anti-Caturday posts.
cm's changeable moniker:
June 5th, 2012 at 9:25 pm
Over on the Real Scientists thread, this:
… which is kinda resonant. Pitbull, sit down here?
There’s room for many (if we’re honest).
Antiochus Epiphanes:
June 5th, 2012 at 9:50 pm
Aratina: Point eruditely made*. I prefer “ketchup” because that’s what Heinz makes.
*I mean, fie!
Phalacrocorax, aus der Dritte Welt:
June 5th, 2012 at 10:18 pm
*squawk*
I thought I was having some sort of hallucination. First, I saw a series of dano’s comments celebrating the victory of guvnor Walker. But, as soon as I reloaded the page, the posts were all gone! Every single one of them. I checked the news, and saw that it was the depressing truth: Walker was bound to win. So, what were those vanishing messages? My imagination? But how could they be accurate if I didn’t remember the recall election was today? Prescience? A message from the afterlife?
Full of dread, I decided to check the dungeon and realized that the awful truth lay on the latter option. As I saw those fateful words engraved in moss-covered stone, I knew I’d never forget them. dano was gone! Forever! And we never got the chance to play with him here!
*sobs*
ibyea:
June 5th, 2012 at 10:36 pm
Wait, how the heck did Gov Walker survive a recall election? Who were the idiots who voted for him, and why would they be stupid enough to vote for him if they saw what he was doing against the unions?
Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:
June 5th, 2012 at 10:42 pm
voter suppression and wads of Koch-cash spent on anti-union, anti-recall propaganda
John Morales:
June 5th, 2012 at 11:01 pm
Hey, Jadehawk.
I remember you wrote “anyway, I don’t want to hang around the stupid, quarantined trolls, but TET is becoming increasingly less useful for discussion, too.”
As you can see, the latest specimen has ceased to react to stimulus, and we are bereft for the nonce.
(This makes zombie hunger grow, and as it does, so does the irritation — then, what everyone is waiting for: Cannibalistic Zombie Carnage Ensues!)
theophontes (坏蛋):
June 5th, 2012 at 11:01 pm
Webcam to Hong Kong Observatory. Transit of Venus. Cam1 (Southern District) & Cam 2 (Sai Kung) & cam 3 (Tsim Sha Tsui)
John Morales:
June 5th, 2012 at 11:06 pm
theophontes, meh.
I’ll check out the time-lapse composites in due course.
(This need for immediacy and shared excitement is for… um, other people)
Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:
June 5th, 2012 at 11:24 pm
that’s my hope
ibyea:
June 5th, 2012 at 11:40 pm
I am disgusted. This country has no hope.
John Morales:
June 6th, 2012 at 12:02 am
All I can say is that, were not PZ a Poopyhead, we’d have Pirate Mode back.
(Everything sounds more interesting yet detached in piratical cant, and levity can’t be underestimated)
theophontes (坏蛋):
June 6th, 2012 at 12:18 am
@ John M.
Too late anyway.
Elvis has left the building.Venus has left the transit.Caine, Fleur du mal:
June 6th, 2012 at 12:25 am
Theophontes, there are new rats in da house.
Ichthyic:
June 6th, 2012 at 12:36 am
I am disgusted. This country has no hope.
*reads this without scrolling up*
I’m guessing you just saw that Scott Walker won his recall election?
overwhelmingly?
how the FUCK does that work?
there have been 3 recall elections for governors in US history, all have been suspect. I was there for the recall of Gray Davis in CA.
there were ten TIMES more reasons to recall Scott Walker, and yet he becomes the very first governor ever to win a recall election.
*shakes head sadly*
Ichthyic:
June 6th, 2012 at 12:39 am
dano was gone! Forever! And we never got the chance to play with him here!
*kicks rock*
awwww mannn!
:(
theophontes (坏蛋):
June 6th, 2012 at 12:48 am
Re: Food
I don’t have my own pix with me, but Gansu Province is famous for its sheep’s head soup. . I have not had the chance to eat some for a while, but the barbecued spinal cord I had in Xian recently was to die for.
…
Book recommendation (especially for ‘Merkins): The Battle for Spain, by Antony Beevor. Quote (my emphasis):
Another interesting aspect: The (fascist) nationalists used the colonial army’s Moroccan reguliers for terrorist acts against their own people. To get the reguliers fired up for the fray, they accused the Republic of wanting to abolish Allah.
John Morales:
June 6th, 2012 at 12:49 am
Oh hey, Ichthyic, someone on the (stupid?) thread asked about Enzed, and I pointed them to you at TET.
(Transparency)
theophontes (坏蛋):
June 6th, 2012 at 12:57 am
@ Caine
[New ratties.]
Squeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(Sam has got the same fur colouring as Ms Molly (our cat))
Ichthyic:
June 6th, 2012 at 1:07 am
Oh hey, Ichthyic, someone on the (stupid?) thread asked about Enzed, and I pointed them to you at TET.
covered over there.
Caine, Fleur du mal:
June 6th, 2012 at 1:09 am
Theophontes:
Aaaaaaw. Sam looks a great deal like Esme, their colouring is very close. Havelock is our first black rat. I updated again, over in that other thread. ;p
Havelock has been doing magnificently, he’s an explorer and has a calm nature. Sam is a screamer and on the dramatic side. Esme & Havelock are quite taken with one another. Rubin has been helping Sam to cope.
Sam finally stopped hiding and made his way back upstairs, and discovered the dish of chocolate Ensure. He hath declared it good.
Esme and Rubin have been so good and very accepting of the new boys, which is such a relief. Of course, it’s early days, so I don’t want to speak too soon, but right now, it’s all looking good. :D
theophontes (坏蛋):
June 6th, 2012 at 1:55 am
@ Caine
I see your rattehz and raise you two kittehz: molly & maxxie
Caine, Fleur du mal:
June 6th, 2012 at 2:04 am
Theophontes:
:overdoses on cute: Adorable!
theophontes (坏蛋):
June 6th, 2012 at 7:20 am
re: Ms Molly
Of course pronounced with a Southern drawl :
Mmmmmhhhhmmm, mizzz’ maaawwwlllyyy….
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
June 6th, 2012 at 7:26 am
wait
where?
theophontes (坏蛋):
June 6th, 2012 at 8:31 am
@ Alethea
Ancient Greek solution for debt crisis.
Phalacrocorax, aus der Dritte Welt:
June 6th, 2012 at 9:00 am
Tricky question, Reverend, due to its multiple meanings. You could be asking where had the dano gone to, the answer of which would be, of course, under the happy bridge to Valhalla, where all the banned trolls live in eternal bliss, able to brag to each other about the time when they were hit by the almighty banhammer.
On the other hand, Your Chimpness could be inquiring on where on earth did we not get the chance to play with dano, as he seemed to be sharing his most profound musings with us on every single thread lately. While true, I still regret that he was never properly studied under controlled conditions here in the Zombie Lab.
The bullcrap above is a public service brought to you by your pal Phal. *squawk* Was that bullcrap useful for you? Don’t let me know!
*leaps from the perch and flies away*
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
June 6th, 2012 at 10:52 am
…….
A. R:
June 6th, 2012 at 2:01 pm
Warning, scifi has been sighted on the creobot video thread.
Caine, Fleur du mal:
June 6th, 2012 at 2:56 pm
Rev. BDC, Dano is in the dungeon, with only ‘spammer’ listed as the reason. I think he was banhammered after posting in the Get out of Louisiana thread.
dianne:
June 6th, 2012 at 3:02 pm
Wait a minute. People are here chatting about kittens and rats and other pets? I thought this thread was only for shouting matches and dismemberment of creationists.
Antiochus Epiphanes:
June 6th, 2012 at 3:19 pm
dianne: That’s a goddamned lie.
But also, you’re right. Damn the cuddly! A canker upon the cute!
PZ Myers:
June 6th, 2012 at 3:57 pm
Dano went on a spamming spree, posting the same one liner about the Wisconsin election on numerous threads — including resurrecting old threads that had nothing to do with Wisconsin or politics. All of which were caught and deleted, along with himself.
chigau (違う):
June 6th, 2012 at 8:42 pm
It’s really windy here.
John Morales:
June 6th, 2012 at 9:03 pm
At least it’s not scented with carrion-troll spoor, right now.
theophontes (坏蛋):
June 6th, 2012 at 10:55 pm
@ dianne / Antiochus Epiphanes
It is a matter of perspective. Both rats and cats are really cold blooded killers:
Kitten devouring rabbit (do not click if you like rabbits.)
Rats attacking human (click if you don’t like humans)
Their cold-blooded killing instincts make them the perfect denizens of TZT. (The consequent zombie rabbits are a bonus.)
Ichthyic:
June 7th, 2012 at 4:17 am
speaking of killing things with fire…
I just perfected my cajun-blackened kingfish with carmelized peas and onions over rice.
I love it when my own cooking turns out better than I expected.
sadly, I have no live witnesses to this event; buffybot is downtown with her LSG crew.
:(
I can post the recipe though:
-kingfish fillet (any firm-fleshed fish will do; 1/2″ – 3/4″ thick)
-half onion (red or white)
-half cup of peas (fresh or frozen)
-1 teaspoon cajun seasoning (double if it’s on the mild side, or add 1/4tsp red pepper flakes for extra heat, or you can make it from scratch if you know how)
-half cup dark soy sauce (the thick stuff, not “kikoman table sauce”)
-1 tblspn maple syrup. yeah, you heard me. in fact, make it 1.5
-half lemon (squeeze the juice into the mixing bowl with the rest, then just toss the peel in there too)
-1 tsp grated fresh ginger
-1 tsp ground garlic (or 2 regular sized cloves, mashed)
-1.5 cup water
-1/2 tsp basil (dried)
-1/2 tsp tarragon (dried)
-1/2 tsp marjoram or oregano
-1/4 cup white wine (red will do too)
-olive oil
-high temp cooking oil (anything works here)
Cut the onion into half-inch chunks, approximately, and mix in a bowl with everything but oil and the fish and the peas.
Take a casserole dish, or equivalent, and coat the bottom of it with a bit of olive oil. put your fish fillet in, and cover it with the mixture from the bowl. The liquid should immerse the fish at least halfway deep; find a smaller container if not.
Marinate the fish at least 30 mins, then turn and marinate another 30 mins.
good to cook up some rice while this is going on; I always like to give my rice a chance to sit a bit before dishing it up.
the next part requires some way to apply fast heat to a grill surface. you can use a grill-pan on a BBQ, or a cast-iron grill pan on a stove (a flat pan will cause the coating to stick, and it won’t turn out right).
remove your fish from the marinade and pat lightly dry with a paper towel or similar.
in a saucepan, combine the onions (from the marinade), peas, and about 1/2 cup of the marinade in a pan with 1/4 olive oil, and another 1/4 cup of water. Bring to a boil, then simmer until onions begin to clarify. remove from heat. The sauce should have thickened up a bit, and have just enough to pour on the rice and fish for flavor. not too much!
put your high-temp oil on the grill pan, and WAIT UNTIL IT IS SMOKING HOT. literally, the oil should be close to bursting into flame. The purpose here is to sear the outside of the fish very quickly, sealing in the juices and flavor.
take your fish fillet, and plop it on the smoking hot grill pan. it might try to stick in the early stages, so wiggle a spatula under it if so; once the outer surface is actually cooked, it won’t stick any more. go for about a minute on one side (just to get the crust going), then flip it over – on a different part of the grill pan that is still smoking hot – and give it another minute. now, turn down the heat so it is below smoking temp, and cook each side another minute (two if it’s a thick piece).
make a bed of cooked rice on a platter, and put your fish on top. pour the onion/pea mixture on top of the fish and rice.
them’s good eats!
Antiochus Epiphanes:
June 7th, 2012 at 7:47 am
What a lovely recipe. It would be inappropriate for this macabre thread absent its cannibalistic underpinnings
A. R:
June 7th, 2012 at 11:37 am
chigau: It’s snowing where I am today.
Caine, Fleur du mal:
June 7th, 2012 at 11:39 am
Theophontes, rats are predators. You don’t want to see what they’d do to a mouse…
chigau (違う):
June 7th, 2012 at 11:53 am
A. R
snow *shudder*
Bright sunshine and +20° here.
Ichthyic:
June 7th, 2012 at 4:22 pm
It would be inappropriate for this macabre thread absent its cannibalistic underpinnings
well, I did catch the kingfish (19kg)and prepare it myself
should I add a colorful and bloody story to that effect?
ogremeister:
June 7th, 2012 at 4:24 pm
The stuff falling on Colorado Springs last night wasn’t snow, but hail. And if there are any meteorologists around, I’m curious if there’s a term for this kind of cloud formation that dropped it:
Picture 1
Picture 2
Picture 3
Picture 4
Thanks!
Ichthyic:
June 7th, 2012 at 4:27 pm
I believe those are examples of
Cirrocumulus mamma
Ichthyic:
June 7th, 2012 at 4:29 pm
on second though, naww, too low and heavy.
Ichthyic:
June 7th, 2012 at 4:30 pm
adjust to:
cumulonimbus mamma (mammatus)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mammatus_cloud
ogremeister:
June 7th, 2012 at 4:36 pm
That’s it! Many thanks. Have never seen them before this storm before.
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
June 7th, 2012 at 4:43 pm
after letting the back jungle… I mean yard go far to long due to a number of colliding circumstances (rain, broken lawnmower, dying dog, work travel… um…. beer festival) I finally mowed it today.
Halfway through mowing next to the fence that backs up to a city owned field with off shore radio antennae I realized
HOLY FUCKING SHIT
That’s poison ivy.
uh
I’m very allergic / reactive to poison ivy.
The next few days / weeks should be interesting.
fuckity fuck fuck
Ichthyic:
June 7th, 2012 at 4:44 pm
they are associated with high energy storms.
it’s no wonder there was hail!
in other areas of the US, you’d be eyeing those carefully to watch for tornado generation.
Ichthyic:
June 7th, 2012 at 4:45 pm
I’m very allergic / reactive to poison ivy.
oops.
OK, do you know how to remove the oils safely from your skin?
Ichthyic:
June 7th, 2012 at 4:47 pm
tip:
DO NOT TAKE A HOT SHOWER.
I would use something to try and denature the oil; it’s quite stable.
this might lead to some good tips:
http://www.poison-ivy.org/html/faq.htm
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
June 7th, 2012 at 4:53 pm
luckily i was wearing long pants. My main concern is the particulates in the air
either on my skin or inhaled.
And I already took a shower. not hot but not cold.
so we’re at wait and see mode
Ichthyic:
June 7th, 2012 at 4:54 pm
from what I’ve seen (I’m one of the lucky immune types), washing with a good grease-cutting dishwashing soap is your best bet.
don’t forget your clothes!!
they will be covered with oil too.
again, washing with a very strong detergent, and bleach if possible, is recommended.
if the clothes are dispensable, do so.
the oil can stay stable for over 6 months, so you need to make sure everything it has come in contact with gets a detergent wash.
good luck!
Ichthyic:
June 7th, 2012 at 4:58 pm
also, this seems to get a lot of recommendations:
http://www.zanfel.com/help/
'Tis Himself:
June 7th, 2012 at 5:19 pm
Poison ivy is difficult but not impossible to eradicate. The chief difficulty lies in being poisoned when trying to remove it. Wear protective clothing, including gloves, whenever you are working near it. Pulling and grubbing are effective means of removal, though they necessitate close contact and will probably need to be repeated once or twice for complete control. If time is not an object, the vines can be smothered by completely covering them with black plastic for several months. Do not mow the plants as this will spew bits and pieces of poisonous material over the area. When removing poison ivy, take frequent breaks to change clothes and scrub thoroughly with a strong soap. Wash contaminated clothing separately. DO NOT BURN any plants. The resulting smoke can cause severe lung damage if inhaled.
Certain herbicides are effective and allow you to control the plant without getting too close to it. Most herbicides for poison ivy control contain triclopyr. This chemical is systemic. It is absorbed by leaves and transferred to stems and roots, and slowly causes the death of the entire plant. It must be applied to an actively growing plant for this process to take place; do not apply it during a drought when even poison ivy will not be growing. Triclopyr is nonselective and will kill any other plants it contacts.
Roundup, Rodeo and other herbicides containing glyphosate don’t work on poison ivy and poison oak. They kill the leaves but don’t touch the roots, which sprout new leaves within a week or two.
cm's changeable moniker:
June 7th, 2012 at 8:13 pm
Woe for the prescriptivists! The Queen’s English Society has folded.
Woe for me! A supposed-to-be-25-minute train journey home took two and a half hours. (Stupid fires in stupid tunnels. Can’t the trains just drive through them at high speed, Hollywood-style?)
Woe is Firefox 13! Look, a new tab being blank was boring, but if you’re going to jazz it up with recent history, couldn’t you have at least added an option to make it open my frickin’ default home page by default? It still takes one click to get there, but now I have to decide where to click.
Don’t make me think, people.
*grump*
Ogvorbis: Ignorant sycophantic magpie.:
June 7th, 2012 at 8:21 pm
Truth.
At a fire in northern California, seven firefighters went to the hospital in three days because of lung irritation thanks to the oils from poison ivy, poison oak and poison sumac. This is why I bring cigars to forest fires: sometimes it is more soothing than the smoke from the fires.
Nonononononono!
If the tunnel is older and has wooden bents, the entire tunnel can collapse. If the tunnel has steel bents, the fire can weaken the steel and the tunnel can collapse. If the tunnel is lined with brick or concrete, the expansion from the heat of the fire can drop large chunks of liner onto the tracks. If the tunnel is unlined, thermal expansion can drop BFRs (Big Rocks) onto the tracks. The net result of all of these, coupled with a train racing through at high speed, would be a derailment or a catastrophic deceleration event. Both of which require shitloads of paperwork.
Wow. A fire story (short) and train shit in the same post.
I feel so proud.
cm's changeable moniker:
June 7th, 2012 at 8:49 pm
Sorry, forgot. Obligatory weather report: windy. A demain.
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
June 7th, 2012 at 8:53 pm
yeah I’m dumb, but not that dumb. I didn’t / wouldn’t burn them.
However now I’m stuck with eradication of it.
Do you think drinking heavily and staring at it with a raised eyebrow will do the trick.
If need be I can turn it into a scowl and maybe even give a few disapproving “hummmms”.
cm's changeable moniker:
June 7th, 2012 at 8:55 pm
Except:
I don’t think it was a big fire. In fact, another train (carrying me) drove (at normal speed) through the aftermath after a mere two hours.
Apparently, this can happen when badgers short out the third rail.
Exploding badgers. Who knew?
'Tis Himself:
June 7th, 2012 at 9:02 pm
If you look in the upper right hand corner of the Firefox 13 home page (the one with all the pictures of the last porn sites you visited), you’ll see a botton with nine small boxes in it. Click on the button and the thumbnails all go away. You still have to navigate to your home page (I know, why isn’t the homepage the default?) but the annoying thumbnails aren’t there.
Ogvorbis: Ignorant sycophantic magpie.:
June 7th, 2012 at 9:03 pm
cm:
And I can guarantee that, during the two hour gap, there were multiple inspectors checking the integrity of the electrical system, the rails, and the structure of the tunnel itself. Even after a minor fire.
There are no minor fires in a railroad tunnel.
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
June 7th, 2012 at 9:05 pm
badgers?
we don’t need no stinkin badgers
'Tis Himself:
June 7th, 2012 at 9:12 pm
Rev BDC, you not only owe me a new keyboard but also a glass of Bowmore Enigma 12 year old single malt.
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
June 7th, 2012 at 9:15 pm
Well then, I have work to do.
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 7th, 2012 at 9:29 pm
‘Tis Himself says:
http://poisonivy.aesir.com/view/control.html says:
ibyea:
June 7th, 2012 at 9:39 pm
@Icthyic
I didn’t think propaganda from billionares could change people’s mind that much, but apparently, people are that stupid.
theophontes (坏蛋):
June 7th, 2012 at 10:49 pm
@ ogremeister
Thanks for the linkies. is truly awesome!
@ ichthyic
Thanks for new term. I first thought they looked like the pope’s chthonic dingleberries, but wouldn’t know how to translate that into Latin.
With regard to groping the pope’s nether regions: Eeeeuw!
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 7th, 2012 at 11:06 pm
Posting this here and mangling nyms so the troll doesn’t notice and can’t google it up later.
Alright, this is definitely Hyprn. That’s a tell. On top of his location, leftish politics, and misogyny, he had a peculiar habit of bringing up Chomsky when not relevant.
Paging PZ, but somebody might copy this elsewhere for his attention?
hotshoe:
June 7th, 2012 at 11:09 pm
CA firefighters encounter poison oak, but never poison ivy nor poison sumac, which do not grow anywhere in CA. But they are all members of the same genus and they all produce the same damaging urushiol, And certainly firefighters in other states have been hospitalized from smoke inhalation of poison oak or poison sumac.
Certain parts of the midwest and south, it could be both poison ivy and poison sumac in the same field. Ouch ouch!
Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:
June 7th, 2012 at 11:15 pm
but then where did his higher education go, and his distaste for African Americans and other non-white immigrants?
unfortunately, I suspect there’s simply a cultural milieu in the UK from which the Hyperon archetype spring. for all i know, they are all on the same mailing list or something.
Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:
June 7th, 2012 at 11:15 pm
oops
theophontes (坏蛋):
June 7th, 2012 at 11:37 pm
@ Caine
Anyone doubting that rats are ideal subject matter on TZT should look up or google “Rat King”.
@ Rev
I used to believe that poison ivy type dermatitis was something restricted to the USA. I learned the hard way that this is not the case after scratching my wrist in rural China. After a few days the skin broke out in lumpy blisters that lasted for weeks.
It appears that the Chinese have their own source of Urushiol in the Chinese Lacquer Tree. In fact just touching lacquered objects can cause an outbreak similar to poison ivy.
I hope all works out well.
Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:
June 7th, 2012 at 11:42 pm
and on an unrelated note… I wonder if “pain” from illness can feel the same as hunger in some instances? because I have a very hard time believing one could be hurting this much everywhere between waist and neck and still feel hungry no matter how much one eats…
*sigh*
i hate being ill
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 7th, 2012 at 11:43 pm
Oh well :) I knew there was a very good chance it would happen anyway.
I thought this incarnation just said he didn’t have a comp sci degree.
Hyperon might have finished his physics degree?
I think it’s still there, a bit veiled (his praise for East Asian immigrants is the same).
It took three attempts before he would answer my “and how about black people in Britain” question, and then he didn’t really answer it, so I clarified and asked a fourth time; he still wouldn’t answer.
What he would say is that twenty-first century Britons and Americans of all skin colors have terrible “work ethic”, but he would not respond to questions about whether some skin colors are more terrible than others.
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 7th, 2012 at 11:47 pm
Uck. I wish I knew. Sounds awful.
Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:02 am
it is. and it’s refusing to go away by itself, so I bit the bullet and made an appointment at the Poor People Clinic to figure out wtf this is.
being ill not only feels horrible, it’s also kinda expensive :-(
Tethys:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:04 am
Do you have your appendix? This was a symptom for my then BF for about a week prior to developing acute appendicitis.
Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:09 am
O.o
I do have my appendix. appendicitis would be distinctly not good. though, most of the pain seems to be in the chest & stomach area, not below, so probably not appendix?
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:11 am
Hell yes it is!
I hope it turns out to be something treatable with generic medications.
Caine, Fleur du mal:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:11 am
Jadehawk:
I’m glad you did, because it sounds like it could be serious.
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:12 am
“Hell yes it is [expensive]!”
Not “[appendix]!”
Yikes.
theophontes (坏蛋):
June 8th, 2012 at 12:18 am
@ Jadehawk
In my experience, the signals can be a bit confusing. I used to go fishing of the coast and would sometimes experience sea sickness. The stomach pain and nausea would seem to go on forever until I realised I had not eaten anything since the night before. Actually eating something helped.
Tethys:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:19 am
Chest pain and stomach pain does not sound like appendicitis. I remember there being some digestive pain and disturbance, but no chest pain.
I hope you are feeling better soon. Being sick is no damn fun.
Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:20 am
fuck yes. and hopefully diagnosable without the use of expensive equipment. last such visit cost me $1000 (though that was at a regular clinic, not the PPC), just to be told it’s harmless and will eventually go away by itself
*whine**moan**whine*
Caine, Fleur du mal:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:26 am
Jadehawk, have you tried drinking milk? If that makes you feel better, it might be an ulcer. I know that sometimes, eating makes you feel better if you have an ulcer, so you feel hungry all the time.
Aratina Cage:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:26 am
‘Tis Himself #41
Will you please stop this copypasta+tinymod madness of yours? Just let us know when you are copying and pasting, OK, then everything is good.
theophontes (坏蛋):
June 8th, 2012 at 12:31 am
Ooops, should have refreshed. Appendicitis may imply NOT eating (My comments are not medical advice. Good that you are seeking proper medical attention.)
Owlmirror:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:34 am
Do you like boring? I like boring.
1) about:config
2) browser.newtab.url
3) change value of above from “about:newtab” to “about:blank”.
Tada!
Boring again.
Or!
You can change it to be the same URL of your home page. Which sounds like it is what you actually want.
Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:41 am
Jadehawk, have you tried drinking milk?that seems to primarily provide very temporary relief from the chest pain; still ridiculously hungry though…
Gen, Uppity Ingrate.:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:47 am
I JUST had my appendix removed due to appendicitis! Like two weeks ago! I just had the stitches removed last Friday. Luckily for me (and you won’t believe how very grateful I was about this!), I live in a country where an operation like that can be done on public healthcare, so I wasn’t bankrupted by this as I would have been in other places *cough* US *cough*.
So, symptoms:
Severe, continuous abdominal pain, located at first in the generalized umbilical area but migrating rightwards and lower as time passes. In my case, that took about 18 hours, give or take.
Interesting about this pain was that at first I thought I was in for a bout of diarrhea or some such, only the diarrhea never started – it wasn’t *that* intense. Another interesting thing about the pain was that it was more intense on the rebound – in other words, it does hurt continuously, but if you were to apply pressure on the site, the pain will peak after you stop applying the pressure instead of peaking *while* the pressure is applied, as one would assume.
Apparently there’s also a way to get an indication of whether it’s more likely to be appendicitis by way of blood tests – I can’t remember what it was exactly that they did, though. I might ask my mom if y’all need me to, she’s the one who actually did the blood tests (she’s a tech). But I can confirm – no chest pain.
ibyea:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:53 am
@Gen Uppity Ingrate
I hope I never get appendicitis. I live in that country you just mentioned. :(
Caine, Fleur du mal:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:54 am
Jadehawk:
Damn, that does sound like an ulcer. I hope you don’t have one, but if it turns out you do, I hope it’s a tiny one which will heal on its own. When’s your appointment?
Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:56 am
tomorrow morning
Owlmirror:
June 8th, 2012 at 1:00 am
I am not a doctor! Nor do I play one on TV.
However, I just Googled [symptoms hunger pain]. Some are just comment threads, but the 3rd hit was about peptic ulcers, which does have both pain and hunger as possible symptoms.
One paragraph that seemed appropriate:
Ulcer pain may be particularly confusing or disconcerting when it radiates to the back or to the chest behind the breast bone. In such cases it can be confused with other conditions, such as a heart attack.
This is not an actual diagnosis! This is a nerd using the Internet! Your health is important! Seek out professionals for actual diagnoses!
But it wouldn’t hurt to mention to the professionals that you read about peptic ulcers.
Gen, Uppity Ingrate.:
June 8th, 2012 at 1:07 am
Good luck, Jadehawk. Add my wishes to those who are hoping that
a.) it’s something totally minor that can be treated cheaply with generic and easily accessed medications
and
b.) One day very soon the concept of a country *without* a proper public health safety net will be anathema and the US (and other places that need to) will join the rest of us EBIL COMMUNIST EMENIES OF GOD in the world of free universal healthcare.
ibyea:
June 8th, 2012 at 1:17 am
@jadehawk
Get better!
chigau (違う):
June 8th, 2012 at 1:35 am
It’s fully dark, here, and still 22° inside my house.
Maybe I‘ll sleep outside.
theophontes (坏蛋):
June 8th, 2012 at 3:57 am
@ chigau (違う)
Watch out for night time ghouls...
PZ Myers:
June 8th, 2012 at 8:11 am
Appendicitis almost killed me when I was 9 years old. My parents thought I just had the flu, and being poor, they were just treating the symptoms as well as they could…it was the passing in and out of consciousness that clued them in that something more serious was going on. Most of what I remember is my parents in a complete panic stretching me out on the back seat of the car and then driving like gangbusters for the hospital.
Oh, yeah, I also remember a day of awful agony building up to that.
Apparently I had an emergency appendectomy to remove an acutely infected appendix. None of this namby-pamby modern stuff where they make a tiny little incision and go snip-snip — nah, they slit open my abdomen from groin to about 6 inches up and to the right. I still get doctors examining me who wonder where I got the giant war wound.
Louis:
June 8th, 2012 at 10:01 am
Jadehawk from here
Well needless to say I’m going to disagree. Shock horror!
1) Lars’ honesty:
When someone starts in with a pretty juvenile (IMO) tu quoque about linguistic usage right after being very politely corrected/informed about the unintended consequences of their demonstrably prejudicial linguistic usage, I am not going out on a limb to bet they are being a {ahem} “less than fulsomely honest interlocutor”. It’s a standard tactic for maintaining their status of “not getting it”. Lars had made a couple of other classic errors as I and others pointed out.
If I’ve made a false positive, a mistaken identification of a dishonest interlocutor, then that’s my bad. I don’t think I have, but I am always happy to be wrong and will cheerfully apologise and admit to that if it is demonstrated to be the case.
2) Kink discrimination:
Not denied, not quibbled with, this unambiguously exists and is not remotely like anything I, or Minnie, said.
3) Dictionaries:
Lars asked for citations of non-sexual usage of “sadomasochism”. I found them. Sadomasochism is the property of possessing both sadistic and masochistic qualities, it is not itself explicitly a sexual term like “bitching” which is specifically derived from a negative stereotype of/attribution to women, even though (as I acknowledged) it is largely used that way. For example, as even Lars noted, it has use in psychology distinct from sexual pleasure. The desire to be tortured and to torture can be, and occasionally are, separate from sexual pleasure.
Imagine a Venn diagram of “bitching” and descriptions of women/supposed feminine attributes. The word “bitching” is completely within the circle of descriptions of women etc. It’s a reference to the supposed (nagging etc) qualities of women.
Imagine the Venn diagram of “sadomasochism” and descriptions of sexual acts/pleasure. The intersection is large but not 100%, some of the circle of “sadomasochism” exists outside that sexual circle. People can be sadists and simultaneously masochists without deriving sexual pleasure. Torturers are one good example (not all of them obviously). Neither does the next circle, of psychological pathologies, overlap completely with the “sadomasochism” circle. One can be sadistic (or masochistic or both) to a degree that is not pathological and still remains not sexual. Again, as I mentioned in my “armchair psychology” (thanks for that Lars!) the “pain”/”suffering” doesn’t have to be extreme or physical or violent, the desire to suffer some form of martydom (ethical, social, personal, whatever) is masochistic, the desire to inflict similar “pain”/”suffering” on others is sadism, the desire to do both is that portmanteau word: sadomasochism. It’s not the same degree or type of thing as sexual sadomasochism, people in dungeons with prisoners and pliers or anything like it.
The sense I took Minnie to be using the word was pretty clear given the context, people deriving pleasure from denying abortion to women, even if they themselves are women or close to women who are harmed in some way by said denial.
Bitching just can’t be used in any way that doesn’t reference femininity, or rather a caricature of it. So the analogy between what I am trying to explain to Lars and what JT to wriggle off the hook is flawed.
If I’m wrong, not only will I admit it and correct myself (wait for JT to do that….don’t hold your breath), but the two words are of markedly different type.
Louis
theophontes (坏蛋):
June 8th, 2012 at 10:27 am
@ PZ
A Turkish friend of mine, at varsity in Holland, had a similarly painful experience with her appendix. She was rushed to hospital and taken to a doctor, expecting to be admitted for an appendectomy. Instead, the doctor decided that she was pregnant.
Friend: “How could I be pregnant?”
Friend: “I’m not pregnant, I’m in pain!”
Friend: “But I’m a virgin!”
{Pointing to her brother}
By now she couldn’t walk, so her brother commandeered a wheelchair and in panic managed to find a doctor – who conducted an emergency appendectomy.
(I can imagine the doctor muttering as they left: )
Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:
June 8th, 2012 at 11:24 am
back from the clinic. that was largely uninformative so far (though I’m sure y’all will be thrilled to know that I have not been having heart attacks), and given the number of tests, rather expensive. now I’ll have to wait about 2 weeks until the results come in, and something tells me it won’t get less painful in that time
*whinge*
Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:
June 8th, 2012 at 11:27 am
theopontes, one of my sociology professors had a similar experience, except with a heart attack. the guys at the ER insisted that she must be pregnant, and she was insisting that that wasn’t possible. they did the pregnancy test anyway, but when the bill came in she refused to pay for it and won. because how exactly is a woman with a hysterectomy supposed to have gotten pregnant, and why exactly didn’t the doc bother to check her medical history?
illithid:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:10 pm
Hey, it’s Inspector fucking Clouseau come to visit the open thread! Let’s see your magnifying glass, Inspector!
Caine, Fleur du mal:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:11 pm
Aw hells, Jadehawk, I’m sorry you have such a long wait. You didn’t get anything for pain relief?
illithid:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:14 pm
Actually, I believe I’m mistaken. You’re more like the Grand Inquisitor, and your magnifying glass is for burning small animals. “Confess! Confess!” No, I won’t confess, you fucking escaped mental patient.
Amphiox:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:15 pm
That IS a war-wound!
Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:17 pm
no. maybe they’re still too worried that it’s heart problems, or maybe they figured the ginormous bottle of pain meds I got when I had my IUD switched out would be sufficient (I’ve been too worried to take them, because they list heart-related side-effects)
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:18 pm
Yeah I remember a time when….
oh wait
different kind of story
Amphiox:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:23 pm
No necessarily! The early symptoms of appendicitis are vague and non-localized in the abdomen. Once acute appendicitis sets in, the pain localizes to wherever on the abdominal wall the inflamed tip of the appendix is nearest/touching from the inside. The “classical” RLQ pain is only in the people with the most common anatomy. Some people have longer, stringier appendices, and the tip could end up floating almost anywhere.
I would keep a close eye on these symptoms. If you are examined early, it is not uncommon for appendicitis to be missed, just because the symptoms are so vague in the early phase. If you start noticing the pain moving and starting to localize somewhere, shrinking in area but increasing in intensity, and if that area becomes tender to a light touch of tap with the finger, seek medical attention again immediately.
Even if it is not appendicitis, it could be diverticulitis, which has a similar symptomatic presentation, except its more commonly localized to the left side.
Amphiox:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:25 pm
Illzit, please be quiet.
The grown-ups are talking about something important right now.
Louis:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:33 pm
Sorry to read about the pain Jadehawk. USB painkillers don’t cut it, although LouisCorp does a fine line in {ahem} borderline recreational pharmaceuticals. Expect a black helicopter shortly. It’s okay, we know where you are.
Louis
Lars:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:36 pm
I’m back. Probably not smart of me, but anyway.
I can understand that my timing was stupid, but I disagree with the accusation of tu quoque.
I’m fully aware that most of us use derogatory terms that we shouldn’t. I have no desire to keep “not getting it”. The reason why I’m “not getting it” is because it will take me some time to think through and digest. I have been a lurker here for some years now, I know that the quality of what Pharyngula’s commenters have to bring to the table is generally high. But I wasn’t prepared for this amount of lack of good faith.
You made some points that I didn’t fully understand, but will read again, and as I said, discuss with a friend of mine. Discussing this with someone I respect in my native language will give me much more than reading explanations on a blog I respect, in English.
Also I’m not sure if your answers really applied all that well to what I said. I started out by saying that if we define everything as ableism, the word loses its meaning. Personality disorders, AFAIU, can be viewed as “normal personality traits” that have gotten out of hand.
Calling someone bordeline is ableism, but calling someone a drama
queen/kingperson isn’t. Is that because the former is a diagnosis and the latter isn’t? If so, my problem with this is that what ought to be a diagnosis and what ought not to, isn’t grounded in anything objective. What’s called ADHD today might a century ago have been called “being a workhorse” or something like that.I’ve already admitted that I’m not that well versed in this, and I realize now that I probably should have kept my mouth shut in that thread.
How is using kinks as insults not kink discrimination? Sorry but I still can’t wrap my head around that logic.
When it was coined in 1890, it was about sexuality. If that meaning has changed since then, it’s because people have been using it as an insult.
I noted that it has its use in psychology, but I never said that use made a distinction from sexual pleasure.
So you think the typical torturer is a sadist? Why do you think he is a sadist, as opposed to, for instance, a psychopath?
(Is me comparing torturers to psychopaths an instance of ableism btw? After all, psychopathy is a diagnosis. And just so you know it, I ask because I don’t know the answer. I suspect it may be yes, but I truly don’t know.)
(And if it is, is calling people psychopaths a worse form of ableism than calling them sadomasochists? I may be going off topic here, so do feel free to ignore whatever you want, but I do wonder, which is the worst insult, and also which is the most ethically defensible of those two insults.)
Sorry, but this is just wrong. In the context of sexuality, sadism is sadomasochism. Masochism is also sadomasochism. The desire to switch between the roles is simply called “switching”. Which is also sadomasochism, btw, but it does not define the term as you seem to say.
How do you know that those people derives pleasure from it? How do you know they’re not doing it out of fear? Stupidity? Social control (which doesn’t equal pleasure either)? Tradition? Religious notions? Pure misogyny? Etc.
Why pleasure?
The way I did read it, you linked the behavior of the abortion-denyers to a form of sexuality, using the form of sexuality as a derogatory term. Given the context, that seemed pretty clear to me. That was probably not what you meant to do, and I was probably being oversensitive but people seem to like to use the phrase “intent isn’t magic”, I think it applies here.
I can understand why you didn’t take me seriously, though. I mean nobody would seriously defend sadomasochists (those creeps) right? Therefore I had to be trolling. Well, that’s the vibe I was getting, and what made me angry. Maybe it’s just all in my head, but … nah, not all of it. Some of it is out there.
Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:42 pm
I kinda suspect acute appendicitis doesn’t take several weeks to get to the REALLY bad stage…
probably not in that dent between my left shoulder and ribcage, just under the clavicle (that seems to be where the pain has settled for now, in addition to occasional stomach pains, rare random stabbing pains in spots all over my upper torso, and the breathing difficulties)
chigau (違う):
June 8th, 2012 at 12:42 pm
Who is illithid addressing?
Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:
June 8th, 2012 at 12:46 pm
SG
"We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":
June 8th, 2012 at 12:46 pm
It depends on a torturer. For one a psychopath or sociopath who tortures might very well be a sadist, it’s not exclusive. Likewise a perfectly normal person could be a torturer as the Milgrim experiment demonstrated. However, an this is just gut feeling/common sense so likely to be wrong; one would assume someone would not pursue a profession or specialization AS a torturer unless they were either sociopath or sadistic. I would think that doing so would either cause massive stress or a desensitization that would make the person effectively more sadistic or callous.
"We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":
June 8th, 2012 at 12:48 pm
As to ableism that’s a tricky question especially as the degree to which sociopathcy or psychopathy is either physiological or conditioned behavior is in debate right now.
Lars:
June 8th, 2012 at 1:44 pm
Personally, I would assume that someone would not pursue a profession or specialization as a torturer unless they were a sociopath, period.
But that’s just biased old me. I still remember when, in my late teens, I realized that sadism and sociopathy were two completely different things that had nothing to do with each other.
That’s when I first realized that not killing myself up to then was not necessarily a moral failure on my part.
Which was quite a relief, to say the least.
I also realized a bunch of other stuff at that time, for instance that sadism wasn’t synonymous with being a callous, egotistical alpha male with no regard for others … oh… well, I may be repeating myself. Anyway, finally being able to look past all the misconceptions, prejudices, and dare I say it again, STIGMA, connected to sadomasochism, allowed me to identify myself as one.
In conjunction with the new-found fact that masochists/submissives actually existed in reality, and not only in my most bizarre dreams, gave me hope that I didn’t have to be forever alone, which previously had seemed the only alternative to kicking the bucket… a relieving period of my life for sure.
But I’m droning on, aren’t I. This is not about the bond between my identity and sadomasochism, but whether or not it’s OK to use the word as an insult.
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 8th, 2012 at 1:46 pm
Lars,
The other day here there was a brief discussion of limp wristed as a homophobic insult, which it is. It’s an interesting case, though, because there’s no obvious reason why it must’ve turned out that way. There’s no a priori logic that could show limp wristed to be an insult about gay men in all possible worlds.
It’s so obviously due to history being contingent.
In fact, if the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics is correct, then there almost certainly exist some Earths on which limp wristed and its cognates were not used refer to gay or “effeminate” men and thus are not homophobic insults.
That’s the objective view. And from that objective view, there is no logical basis for insisting that there ought to be any a priori means of determining what’s a homophobic insult, nor what’s an ableist insult, without observing the patterns of usage on any particular Earth.
"We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":
June 8th, 2012 at 1:49 pm
What if they were sadistic?
Is sadist even a firm psychological thing out side of the sexual fetishism? I sort of figured people just had ranges of capacity for taking pleasure from the pain of another.
Some children or adults might torture a trapped animal for the lulz without being sociopathic or labeled a ‘sadist’, but they are definitely engaged in sadistic behavior.
A. R:
June 8th, 2012 at 1:52 pm
{Klaxon sounding, computer voice from Star Trek is coming over the thread-wide intercom}
-A troll has entered the thread, comments 91 and 93. Troll torturing supplies are available in supply locker 47.-
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 8th, 2012 at 2:03 pm
Also, the non-gendered term you are searching for here is drama llama.
"We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":
June 8th, 2012 at 2:05 pm
@Pitbull/SGBM
You’re better on psyche research, am I missing something?
cm's changeable moniker:
June 8th, 2012 at 2:11 pm
Ogvorbis, apologies! I was over-terse; I meant:
not what came across, which was probably:
(And yes, I knew from the announcements that a MOM was in attendance, doing a 3 mile round-trip walk in the dark carrying an extinguisher …)
cm's changeable moniker:
June 8th, 2012 at 2:13 pm
And Owlmirror, thanks! Sanity restored.
Lars:
June 8th, 2012 at 2:15 pm
Are you sure? Women’s elbows are angled differently than men’s, making their hand movements slightly different, maybe that could be described as “more limp-wristed”? (Whether it should, is a different question.)
I once read something about men being effeminate may be caused by prenatal hormone levels. A little more than “normal” of some hormone (testorone?) in a certain week of the pregnancy. The same article said that homosexuality (at least among males) may have similar causes, but this effect happened at a later stage of pregnancy. And that there will be a certain statistical correlation between men being effeminate and being homosexual because of this.
It seems conceivable that being effeminate may cause a man to move more like women, despite his physiology being fully masculine. After all, we’re more than muscles and bone.
These factoids may or may not be sound, I don’t remember where I read this, but at least I was able to google up a Pubmed article that to me seems to indicate that these is at least research going on in topics relating to this. (But I have no idea about the quantity or quality of this research, nor of the article that I read somewhere.)
Anyway, all this may have come up in the discussion you had, and dismissed for good reasons, for all I know.
dianne:
June 8th, 2012 at 2:15 pm
Random bit of advice to Jadehawk: Go to an ER to get your symptoms checked out. They’ll send you a bill. Use it to wipe your butt. They can’t actually repossess your health or refuse to give you treatment in the future. Collection threats for health care costs aren’t entirely a bluff in that they can and sometimes do ruin your credit, but beyond that there’s simply nothing that anyone can do to you. There are laws against turning people in need of medical care away.
Also has your gallbladder been checked out?
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
June 8th, 2012 at 2:16 pm
nice
Ogvorbis: Ignorant sycophantic magpie.:
June 8th, 2012 at 2:28 pm
Since I was the one who started that, I might as well jump in and make a fool of myself.
Think about portrayals of gay men in films and on television until quite recently. The stereotypical lisp and the limp wrist were, and for some people, still are, the embodiment of male homosexuality. Your point that women’s and men’s elbows have differences (first I’ve heard that) could provide insight into how this particular stereotype got started. A man, flipping his wrist, appears effeminate and is, by US standards, obviously gay.
Does that make sense?
illithid:
June 8th, 2012 at 2:29 pm
Nice proof. How does it feel to be the founder of a new branch of mathematics — etiquette theory?
Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:
June 8th, 2012 at 2:30 pm
*looks suspicious* why gallbladder…?
also, how would the ER help? can they get bloodwork done any faster than the clinic…? I already got the ECG and the lung capacity test, and I’m having an x-ray on monday…
"We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":
June 8th, 2012 at 2:30 pm
I thought it was as simple as Men are muscular and sturdy where women are graceful and flexible. A loose wrist is thus showing a man who is not manly and thus not a real man.
Louis:
June 8th, 2012 at 2:33 pm
Lars,
You are so far off base it’s beyond reason. **I** would (and do) defend sexual sadomasochists. Go to it, as I already said.
If you cannot read what I’ve written for even basic comprehension, take a ticket with LILAPWL and Antiochus Epiphanes and fuck yourself with a rubber hose (to use the words of the Immortal Frank Zappa).
“Nuh uh” isn’t an argument, and even though the most common use of “sadomasochism” is in a sexual context (as already admitted, what…twice now?) it is by no means exclusively so, sufficiently not that it is possible to make in context uses of the word without sexual connotations.
Yawn, another tedious fuckwit who simply cannot take being wrong so has to plead some sort of offence to make themselves righteous. You’re as pointless a fuckwit as LILAPWL when the bit’s between his teeth.
Louis
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
June 8th, 2012 at 2:33 pm
Spare the rod, spoil the child, jail the Dollar
illithid:
June 8th, 2012 at 2:34 pm
Yes, but if the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics is true, then it’s all up for grabs, you know? Q.E.D.
dianne:
June 8th, 2012 at 2:35 pm
An ER can admit you to the hospital, if you need it. If you don’t, you might be better off at a clinic if they’re actually doing the workup. If they’re not, an ER is a way to route around doctors who are acting as road blocks. Yes, I know that’s horribly inefficient. Sorry.
Gall bladder because of right upper quadrant pain associated with eating. Or did I misread your symptoms?
"We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":
June 8th, 2012 at 2:35 pm
Is there something in th water of the thread that turns trolls into ubbermornicunintelligabaltrolls?
Lars:
June 8th, 2012 at 2:36 pm
Not that I am aware of (still not being an expert). The only ICD-10 section where I could find any mention of sadism and masochism, deals with “Disorders of sexual preference” (F65).
F65.5 is the subsection dedicated to sadomasochism.
I don’t like that definition of “sadistic”, but I have to accept that it’s out there, and that I may be in the minority having anything against it.
OTOH I find absolutely no rational reason to accept using the word “sadomasochistic” about the same scenario. That would be a perversion of the medical term, and the only colloquial use of the word that I know of (apart from using it as a sexual slur) is in the BDSM subculture, where it refers to consensual sexual/emotional interactions between sadist(s) and masochist(s).
We sadomasochists haven’t entirely “lost” the word yet (and actually borrowed it from the medical definition to begin with), so we’re in no position to “take it back”, but I would very much like to continue not losing it.
But that depends on people refraining from using the word as a sexual slur. Let’s see how that goes. :|
Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:
June 8th, 2012 at 2:38 pm
oh, I have no pain while eating. I was originally wondering if one can feel hungry instead of being in pain, because I’ve never experienced being this ill and in pain and at the same time being ravenous and not being able to stop feeling hungry
"We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":
June 8th, 2012 at 2:38 pm
I think you’re going to have to accept it since it’s the common usage of it outside of talking about kink.
Caine, Fleur du mal:
June 8th, 2012 at 2:38 pm
Jadehawk:
Oh, your gallbladder can fuck everything else up no end. I hope it isn’t your gallbotherer though, as expensive tests™ would be needed prior to…surgery! Having mine out last year helped a great deal, however, I did not cope with the surgery or recovery well at all and, of course, I have good insurance. Without it, I’d be paying off that fucking surgery until the day I died.
They can do numerous tests at one time, but this includes the expensive tests™.
Lars:
June 8th, 2012 at 2:43 pm
And just when I need that killfile script the most, it dies on me. Fucking typical.
Amphiox:
June 8th, 2012 at 2:43 pm
Jadehawk, the ER can get the bloodwork done immediately, and at least some of the results will be available within a half hour to a couple hours, because the hospital should have its own lab. They can do a chest X-ray and literally have the result within minutes (if you were complaining of pain on breathing I can’t believe that the clinic would do a lung capacity test and not do an X-ray right away).
Irritation of the diaphragm can cause pain referred up into the chest. Both gallbladder or a high riding appendix tip can do this.
Diagnosis over an Internet connection of course should not be trusted, but that is why you need to have a trained professional actually see you.
Louis:
June 8th, 2012 at 2:47 pm
Lars,
If you’re referring to me, please do killfile me. Not dealing with an irredeemable fuckwit like you will be a pleasure. You’ve not paid the slightest attention to any argument I’ve made and can’t deal with the simple fact that you’re wrong. Why do I want to talk to people like you? Oh right….I don’t.
Louis
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 8th, 2012 at 2:59 pm
Ing,
There’s a lot more being said here than I can attend to. One thing I noticed:
That’s true of pretty much everything in the DSM, though.
There isn’t any serious debate over whether or not there are some genetic factors which increase the likelihood that a person will be diagnosed as a psycho/sociopath.
+++++
Lars,
What I’m sure of is that you just gave arguments for why limp wristed might be likely to become a homophobic insult on more Earths than you think I implied. All you’re saying is that on this matter, history might be somewhat less contingent than you think I implied.
Nevertheless, even as you imagine it, history is still contingent. There still is no a priori logic that could show limp wristed to be an insult about gay men on every Earth.
On this Earth, we do not yet have standardized homophobic insults which refer to finger lengths. Maybe we will one day, maybe we won’t. At this point in time, there is no a priori way to know whether this will become common parlance. Likewise, even if you were right about everything you said in #114, it would not follow that limp wristed would necessarily become, in common parlance, an insult for gay men on every Earth where the same biology holds.
dianne:
June 8th, 2012 at 3:01 pm
Jadehawk: It might not be gallbladder. That’s just a typical rule out for abdominal/chest pain in a woman and the radiation to the right shoulder is classic. Usually happens about 1-2 hours after eating, rather than immediately after. Could be entirely off, of course.
Amphiox:
June 8th, 2012 at 3:04 pm
When the uninsured go to the ER, both the law and medical professional ethics require that they must be treated. Hospitals can try to chase down payment after the fact but they usually can recover little more than 10%. So they have to eat the cost, which of course they pass along to the people who ARE insured. And since the uninsured don’t get preventive care and usually wait too long before going to the ER, they present with needlessly severe conditions that cost more to treat.
This is one of the reasons why single payer universal access systems spend on average half of what the US spends, per capita, and have better outcomes across the board.
So to all those out there who don’t want to pay for other people’s healthcare, just note that you already are, and you are paying for it in the most inefficient and costly manner imaginable.
Nightjar:
June 8th, 2012 at 3:06 pm
I haven’t been around much lately, but having just finished catching up with both the thread illithid was trolling before and TZT*, I was wondering the same thing.
*Well, sort of. I mostly skimmed and I don’t think anyone can blame me for pretty much skipping shiloh’s comments altogether.
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 8th, 2012 at 3:07 pm
If anyone’s feeling helpful,
Louis needs some help understanding why some women object to being called “darling” by a man who’s not mutually consensually understood to be on diminutive terms with them.
If he can learn that much, then he may be able to learn why, by extension, a gay man may object to the same.
Amphiox:
June 8th, 2012 at 3:10 pm
Illzit, unless you have access to a portal that allows the free flow of people and ideas between multiple universes(still hypothetical), other worlds have no relevance to social conventions on THIS world.
And in case you haven’t noticed, we are dealing with a potential medical emergency here, which you in your blithering way have decided is appropriate to try to derail. I suppose since Jadehawk is a female human being who is not you, you don’t care, do you?
So unless you have that portal and want to introduce it here, shut up.
Better yet, go THROUGH your portal, close it behind you, and don’t come back.
dianne:
June 8th, 2012 at 3:15 pm
So to all those out there who don’t want to pay for other people’s healthcare, just note that you already are, and you are paying for it in the most inefficient and costly manner imaginable.
IIRC, the US spends more _public_ money on health care than any other country. Probably because it insists on this sort of behavior.
Lars:
June 8th, 2012 at 3:18 pm
True enough. I just wanted to draw some lines between the dots on this here Earth. Probably just me going off-topic anyway, it wouldn’t be the first time.
illithid:
June 8th, 2012 at 3:25 pm
Read the thread, shitbag. I wasn’t the one who suggested this, but was making fun of the idea. I’m not the only one posting off-topic, either.
Caine, Fleur du mal:
June 8th, 2012 at 3:32 pm
TZT is an open thread, there is no set topic. It is the Troll Pen, so it’s a perfect place for illithid.
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 8th, 2012 at 3:40 pm
Evidently without understanding it, if you think Amphiox summarized correctly.
There is no claim that “other worlds have relevance to social conventions on THIS world”.
It is simply an exercise that helps us imagine the range of possibilities, of how customs might have turned out differently. It situates us in a vast tree of contingent histories.
In this way, it can be helpful — as it has before, and perhaps was once again just now — in explaining why, in our world, it is not always possible to use logic to predict what will or will not become a homophobic or ableist insult.
Of course, there is no transfer of information between worlds once they diverge. And the thought experiment does not claim otherwise.
illithid:
June 8th, 2012 at 4:12 pm
No, not really. You’re confusing two radically different notions of probability. One notion, you’re taking as a possible state any given point in a phase space which is specified by some theory (the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, in your case). For the second notion, you’re taking a much more conventional theory of possibility, i.e. the one that allows Al Gore to have been President of the United States, but not PZ Myers. (This refers to slightly varying initial conditions in some deterministic or approximately deterministic system.) Invoking the Everett theory doesn’t provide us with insight into who could have won the election — or, in this situation, whether homosexuals could have been firm-wristed.
If Everett is correct, then there’s some world where everyone’s going around on pogo sticks. Do you think it likely that the average man in the street would entertain for a second the idea that the pogo stick could have superseded the car as the number one mode of transport? Different notions of possibility, my boy, different notions of possibility.
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 8th, 2012 at 4:14 pm
Lars,
S’okay. I’ll try to bring it back around now to how your
So the history of psychiatry is contingent too. So what, exactly? For the matter of not-using-psychiatric-terms-as-insults, this is not a problem. Just keep up with the times.
Your example of what if douchebaggery becomes a clinical diagnosis is, as you realize, extremely far-fetched. To give just one reason why it’s very unlikely — psych professionals are already very much concerned with the stigmatization of existing diagnoses. Thus they are not likely to pick a term which is already used as an insult and use it as a diagnostic label.
It’s an amusing hypothetical. But there’s no point in seriously worrying about it. If douchebaggery ends up in the DSM-VI, then okay, I’ll say let’s rethink this approach. For now, it looks like an example of “hard cases make bad
lawmores”, except this is a non-existent case rather than a hard one.life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 8th, 2012 at 4:28 pm
Hyperon,
Yes, but — assuming the mediocrity principle — the set of such worlds is probably smaller than the set of worlds where people use automobiles.
Likewise the set of worlds in which PZ Myers became president is probably smaller than the set of worlds where Al Gore did.
illithid:
June 8th, 2012 at 4:33 pm
Posted by Louis in the socail justice thread:
There’s something indescribably hilarious about watching one of the most antagonistic jackals in the pack being devoured by the other jackals.
Cipher, OM, MQ:
June 8th, 2012 at 4:43 pm
I’m not supposed to be here at all, and I’ve only skimmed so I’ve missed a lot, but I really wanted to get this in before the subject is forgotten: Thanks for this, Lars. I had similar problems from the other side, and I’ve always suspected that it would be even worse for sadists. (When my #idnr with that information in it goes up, I’ll link to it here.)
Data point: I, too, dislike strongly the fact that sadism and masochism are both used for immoral, harmful, destructive behavior while still being used for sexual preferences, because there is enough silence and ignorance around the issue of kink in at least some circles that the conflation can be destructive to people’s lives.
Unfortunately, as I’ve said elsewhere, I do think it’s a lost battle, but I can’t help how much it makes me cringe and/or grind my teeth when, for instance, antifeminist women are referred to as “masochists” – because I used to be an antifeminist masochist, who feared feminists in part specifically because of a mistaken notion of the feminist view on submissives (derived from contact with sex-negatives), with a Better Than Those Other Girls Chill Girl™ mindset that interlocked with my submissiveness to create seriously fucked up outcomes. Because of that conflation and because of the stigma, I thought that masochism necessarily entailed victimhood and wanting-deep-down/deserving it.
cm's changeable moniker:
June 8th, 2012 at 5:17 pm
Pitbull, many-worlds is wrong. Well, almost completely certainly, wrong.
(It’s not even a good hypothetical.)
Two nations separated by a common language.
English familiarities are deployed much more widely in casual communication than in the US. (I was called “love” by a supermarket checkout person the other day, “alright my lover” is a generic “hello person I know” in the southwest (UK that is, not AZ)).
Do not assume an assumption of intimacy. (We are brits after all, and we don’t do that (shudder).)
It’s best to assume (non-pond-crossing) humour.
For what it’s worth, as an employee of an American company, I get this all the time, just the other way round.
Ichthyic:
June 8th, 2012 at 5:21 pm
There’s something indescribably hilarious about watching one of the most antagonistic jackals in the pack being devoured by the other jackals.
it’s not indescribable.
the word you are looking for, but like so much else, entirely ignorant of, is schadenfreude.
of course, since you’re also ignorant of the social dyanics of this blog, it’s really a false feeling on your part.
glad to see you here.
*gets out bean bag shotgun and cattle prod*
hope you be staying here for the duration?
cm's changeable moniker:
June 8th, 2012 at 5:23 pm
Oh, fuck. When sketching out a post, it’s generally best to hit Preview instead of Submit.
When you get it wrong, you get an insight into my thought processes. (And time to muse on the merits of transactionality WRT the HTTP POST protocol.)
Hope it wasn’t too disillusioning. ;)
cm's changeable moniker:
June 8th, 2012 at 5:25 pm
^When I get it wrong …
*stepping away from the computer*
Ichthyic:
June 8th, 2012 at 5:26 pm
Louis needs some help understanding why some women object to being called “darling” by a man who’s not mutually consensually understood to be on diminutive terms with them.
or maybe you need some help in understanding different countries usage of colloquialisms?
should louis change his sense of sensibilities he grew up with because you grew up with different ones?
what makes you right and him wrong?
only your sense of righteous crusade to change everything to make the world more comfortable for you.
not denying you should, mind you, only natural i suppose, but don’t expect everyone else to agree.
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 8th, 2012 at 5:28 pm
I am aware. Hence my care to specify: if/then.
I think it’s usefully illustrative, so I ask:
Why not?
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 8th, 2012 at 5:45 pm
Nope. I would not knowingly say to a British woman, “you really got your fanny kicked in that argument”. If I said it without thinking, and was told to desist, I would not insist that there was no sexist effect of my words. Intent is not magic.
If he is interested in not contributing to homophobia in the USA, (and if there is no sexism involved in a man calling an unfamiliar woman “darling”, which I do not believe to be the case, but which we can pretend for the sake of discussion) then he should use code-switching as appropriate.
We had a well-meaning US-based commenter here recently who used the term “Paki” with total naivity; upon being informed of the term’s racist effect in Britain, said commenter took note and decided not to do it again. That is the rational course for someone who does not want to contribute to racism; if said commenter had not cared about racism, then a rational course would have been to say “okay, I don’t care.”
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 8th, 2012 at 5:46 pm
Guh:
(and if there is no sexism involved in a man calling an unfamiliar woman “darling” in Britain, which I do not believe to be the case, but which we can pretend for the sake of discussion)
Lars:
June 8th, 2012 at 5:47 pm
Yes. I know one who says he would like to throw all the pidgeon-holing out of clinical psychology, and use only one diagnose: “Crazy”. And then proceed to treat the patiens as individuals, instead of treating them as diagnoses. That makes sense to me.
(I don’t think he was serious about using the word “crazy”, but if they did, maybe it could help make the word less stigmatizing? Anyway.)
What do you think of the words “psycho” and “psychopath” used colloquially? AFAIU, the colloquial “definition” is much broader than the clinical one, and is often used as an insult.
AFAIU (and I may be wrong), clinical psychopaths are also not very likely to feel hurt about it. Is that relevant?
It seems to me that laypeople often use psychiatric terms for the same reasons that laypeople use terms from physics or biology: One (not very good) reason is to add weight to their words. Another (better?) reason is because the fields of science are really good at defining things. We say tubercolosis instead of consumption, not to add weight to the word, but because it is more accurate.
The problem with ableism is that this can (and often will) hurt the people who are genuinely afflicted with the problem described by whatever term is colloquially used, and stigmatize them.
But is there a better word to use instead of for instance “psycho”, that conveys the same meaning without refering to a psycological condition?
Same with “paranoid”, it colloquially refers to an irrational distrust or fear of people, but also to a host of diagnoses. Is there a good replacement that isn’t an ableism, but still describes the irrational distrust etc.?
I’m still not back on topic. Sorry. Let me collect the threads.
* Aww, I have a fan!
* A compendium of the dumbest anti-choice arguments ever
(*re-reading*) Well, OK, maybe I wasn’t entirely off topic either.
The word “depressed” is seldom used as an insult, even if it is a diagnosis. Probably because depression doesn’t generally affect your behavior in a way that may cause you to behave badly towards others. Sociopathy and paranoia, OTOH, may. I would think this a reason why these words are used as insults, because they may arguably be somewhat (if not accurately) descriptive of the negative traits that one wants to highlight in the person one is insulting?
At the same time, a psychriatric diagnosis is stigmatizing in itself. Also when it’s only used clinically. Because it says that There Is Something Wrong With Your Head.
Douchebaggery may not be pathologized in the foreseeable future, but other problematic behavior patterns will (and they will no doubt receive diagnostic labels that are as non-stigmatizing as possible). If I understand you correctly (which I probably don’t but I have already “opened my mouth to remove all doubt” anyway), calling someone on such a negative behavior (in an unfriendly manner) will become ableism the moment the behavior is pathologized.
That seems strange to me. Euphemistic labeling of diagnosis may offset it, but euphemism is just sweeping the dust under the rug anyway, and as far as I understand natural languages, they always manage to shake that dust out from the rug again pretty quickly.
When it comes to mentalisms, I’m just not sure if the bigger problem lies in the colloquial use of diagnostic terms, or in the clinical use of those diagnostic terms in the first place. And I guess that’s what I’ve been using all those words to arrive at. Hm. Apparently I’m not very good at this.
cm's changeable moniker:
June 8th, 2012 at 6:06 pm
Because in some of the many worlds there is a (are many) God(s)?
We have no evidence for the other-worlds (or to be more precise, we have no way of observing them to access that evidence) … therefore Bohr.
Lars:
June 8th, 2012 at 6:11 pm
Thanks for reading, and answering. This is not something I talk about often.
I guess that’s reason enough to speak up, and take the shit flinging as it comes. For the children, so to speak. After all, they do grow up. Some of them grow up kinky. And some of those grow up suicidal.
Well I guess I’ll eventually go down either fighting windmills or in self-denial, then. Is there a third option?
Luckily for me, in my country, the same feminists who openly and aggressively equate all (including gay) sadomasochism with sexual abuse of women, are giving feminism a bad name, probably because they equate almost everything with abuse of women.
But their rabidity also kept me from accepting the importance of feminism for many years. As it happens, it was Pharyngula that made me see it.
illithid:
June 8th, 2012 at 6:12 pm
No, it’s a very special kind of Schadenfreude. Not just the pleasure of seeing your foe cast down and humiliated, but the joy of seeing the look on his face as he tastes his own medicine! Not to mention the delicious irony of the Witch-hunter General suddenly be accused of sorcery. Priceless.
Lars:
June 8th, 2012 at 6:26 pm
I phrased that badly. They don’t equate S&M with abuse of women, they say that S&M (including gay S&M) is abuse of women. As I said, rabid. They’ve probably done more damage to feminism in this country than anything else.
cm's changeable moniker:
June 8th, 2012 at 6:42 pm
If you are interested in not contributing to American cultural imperialism in the rest of the world (and if [some assumption based on not having gone to the place]) then you should [do something].
Do you see how this works? ;)
Cultural relativism sucks, but it’s how we negotiate the world.
(Aside: it’s hard for me to see how a single comment from a known-sarcastic, known-self-deprecating Brit who uses a known-to-be-used-ironically word on a blog read by a relatively small number of US-anians “contributes to US homophobia”. FSM knows, we hear enough about the discrimination that the country itself provides. And we protest it. But it’s unrealistic to think that an ironic comedic contribution is somehow making it worse, given the population disparity. But I have Brit lenses, so, you know, englighten.)
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 8th, 2012 at 6:49 pm
Lars,
I don’t know. I haven’t given it much thought because it’s at the far end of what people might potentially be persuaded to change their behavior about. Lost cause, or nearly so. Therefore I’ll be skipping your questions about it.
I don’t know, but let’s think about it. I personally don’t figure it’s a problem to say “that’s a paranoid thought” to someone if they are apparently saying something paranoid. Probably everyone has thought something paranoid within the last month, so we know at least what a paranoid thought is. And then the two or more people involved can discuss whether it is actually a paranoid thought, or a justified one. At this level of discussion, I think, it is likely to be not a big deal; the discussion can take place without categorizing any participant as essentially or clinically paranoid.
That may be part of why some insults happen, but don’t overlook insults like “retard” which indicate a more general contempt for mental differences. As long as this generalized contempt is known to exist, don’t be too quick to assume there’s self-defense behind any particular mental insult.
I don’t know about all this. I don’t think it’s trivial to determine in the abstract like you’re trying to do here. From the example of paranoia, I think it can be non-stigmatizing to say, in an unfriendly way, “that’s a paranoid notion and you’re an asshole for thinking of others what way.” May or may not be true — but I don’t figure that it’s obviously ableism, since pretty much everybody has some paranoid thoughts.
Consider again how this discussion started. Someone claimed Beale heard voices telling him to have a judge attacked. But it turns out there’s no evidence Beale heard any voices. Ockham’s razor says Beale was just full of shit. If Beale is saying something violent, and we claim it’s because he’s hearing voices, but in fact he’s not hearing voices, then we’ve erroneously taught a stronger correlation between violence and hearing voices, and this error contributes to stigma. Therefore care should be taken to avoid these errors.
If it were true that Beale had heard voices telling him to plan violence against the judge, and Beale’s case was not presented as a cherry-picking expedition — that is, if it was accompanied by accurate statistics about how most people who hear voices do not act violently because of them, and ideally accompanied by individual stories as vivid as the one about Beale — then that wouldn’t be so objectionable.
Whatever you think is so complex about all these abstractions and hypotheticals you bring up, you ought still be able to see this point regarding what really happened.
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 8th, 2012 at 7:05 pm
? None of this pertains to the thought experiments I’m using it for. It’s okay that gods exist in some of those worlds and it’s okay that we can’t observe them.
No, I don’t see, because as I said I would accept correction on the use of terminology which is sexist to Britons but not Americans.
It’s making it worse because I would not have experienced that reminder of my second-class status yesterday, and would not today have to be defending my right to ask people not to unkindly remind me of my second-class status.
Or, you know, every discussion we’ve ever had about “cunt” here.
Or, you know, http://www.microaggressions.com/
Go read what Aratina Cage said in the other thread. I’m not interested in enlightening you. Not my job to educate everyone who doesn’t care to self-educate. Just don’t talk to me the way Louis did and I’ll do my best to forget that you’re being an asshole about this.
Amphiox:
June 8th, 2012 at 7:17 pm
I note that illzit has, again, deliberately ignored the second part of the post it is responding to, in its usual dishonest fashion.
The part that went:
This of course is the same illzit who spent so much time on the prior thread wanking about Pharyngula being an echo chamber so unfairly beating on its poor wanking ass.
This is how Pharyngula normally operates.
Louis is not going to get his Molly revoked over this (nor Brownian, Ichthyic, etc), nor LILAPWL (if the rumors I hear about his former identity are true).
And Illzit? That “look on his face” you’re wanking to right now? Unless you happen to be a remote viewer, that’s just your imagination. If the vision remains persistent, you would be well advised to seek medical attention forthwith.
And that you would admit (and proudly) to deriving pleasure from observing this is a fact that tells us a great deal about your character as a human being, or lack thereof.
Not that this is any sort of new revelation about you.
cm's changeable moniker:
June 8th, 2012 at 7:26 pm
illithid:
Eh, we’re still discussing. When we’re done, come back and see what we decided, OK?
^^
BetterMore practical you.Lars:
June 8th, 2012 at 7:47 pm
I do.
Still, I’m not quite sure about to what extent I should generally view mentalism as the problem, as opposed to a symptom of an underlying problem.
And by that I do not mean to say that mentalism isn’t problematic. I’m just not sure how much fighting a symptom (provided that mentalism is one) will help in the long run.
OTOH, it’s probably better to fight a symptom that can be fought, than to try fighting an underlying cause that cannot.
cm's changeable moniker:
June 8th, 2012 at 8:00 pm
I’m sorry. I’m not trying to be an asshole. I don’t think I’m being an asshole.
But if I am, in whose perception am I being an asshole?
Genuine question.
—
That wasn’t the point. Because attitudes to work (holidays, sickness, maternal/paternal leave, whatever) in US companies bleed over into non-US countries. Because I had to warn my US boss that what xe wanted to say (but I told xir* not to) would have breached UK employment law.
Because, you know, it’s not just about sexism and/or homophobia.
Hence “cultural”.
*grump*
* And I fricking hate x-pronouns.
—
I will now go on record to say that you have first class status. In this discussion, on this thread, in real life.
But if there are problems in your world (which as I alluded above is different to mine), just don’t blame me for them, thanks.
I have posted several things about micro-inequities. Not my job to explain to you that “everyone” does not include the person you’re talking to.
*raspberry*
John Morales:
June 8th, 2012 at 8:15 pm
Amphiox,
Fact: ॐ is strange gods before me.
John Morales:
June 8th, 2012 at 8:17 pm
Hey, ॐ, do you like today’s Pharyngula more than in times of yore?
life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:
June 8th, 2012 at 8:39 pm
Lars,
Well, perhaps I share your uncertainty about this, depending on what it is you regard to perhaps be the root cause.
Maybe the cause can be fought. But in any case we should fight the symptoms too because they reduce quality of life.
+++++
John, the most fun I ever had at Pharyngula was arguing with a certain libertarian for a solid year.
We still get to argue, but now we can argue by email, where every participant has a very good model of the other’s understanding, so information is exchanged more efficiently.
So the answer to your question is “no, but I’m okay with that.”
Brownian:
June 8th, 2012 at 8:42 pm
Louis,
I did not.
Use one of those other ones instead then, the ones that don’t have the extra baggage that this one man mentioned has in the context of his experience being a gay man in the US.
Jesus, fuck.
Who are you even talking to here?
Great. Now that you’ve trounced that straw man, can you deal with the context of this one man on this blog who asked you not to use one fucking word to refer to him, and the historical and present reasons for why that word and its implications bother him?
Back to my beer.
Louis:
June 8th, 2012 at 8:46 pm
LILAPWL from here
LILAPWL,
Don’t flounce before this bit! ;-)
About that you’re right. And I fucked up. I absolutely did not mean that the onus is on the oppressed group, and yet it’s exactly what I said. Entirely my bad. I fucked up.
Also this from your linked article:
Is, believe it or not and you have no reason to believe me I realise, a significant motivator in me staying in this conversation. I might be wrong. I don’t think I am, I think I’ve made a very limited case which isn’t being addressed despite repetition and the occasional deviation into acknowledging the errors I’ve made that I’ve noticed so far.
I’ll try to bring more light and less heat from now on. I confess to irritation (did it show?) informing the tenor of more than one response. And I can only apologise for that limitation and annoyance on my part.
As for the rest: the game goes on! (And yes, I know it’s not a game)
Louis
PZ Myers:
June 8th, 2012 at 8:49 pm
Fresh start for more battles.