You is all a bunch of poofs!

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 12366
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#721

Post by Matt Cavanaugh » Fri Feb 01, 2019 6:09 pm

Biblical scholar, Hermann Detering, author of The Fabricated Paul, who also spanked Dicky Carrier, has died.

http://www.mythicistpapers.com/2019/01/ ... ment-42788

mordacious1
.
.
Posts: 912
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:33 pm
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#722

Post by mordacious1 » Fri Feb 01, 2019 6:13 pm

Your career as a liberal Democratic politician is going gray until those photos from college show up:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/vi ... 889695b955

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 16636
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#723

Post by Brive1987 » Fri Feb 01, 2019 6:23 pm

Here is the hate speech rub.
if white power is even symbolically threatened by laws promoting equality, then those laws will be appropriated by white litigants spurred on by a sense of aggrieved entitlement or qualified by white politicians until dominance is restored.
These laws exist to dismantle white privileged - they are not to be used by non-minorities.

Read and weep. Replace any of the berated White claims with the equal and opposite aboriginal claim and you get the picture.
https://www.smh.com.au/opinion/the-real ... v786p.html

Lsuoma
Fascist Tit
Posts: 10612
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 5:58 pm
Location: Punggye-ri
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#724

Post by Lsuoma » Fri Feb 01, 2019 6:25 pm

Burzho - I got that Officers' Reading Club book, and I'm enjoying it a lot. I also got a couple of books about B.A.O.R. (in this case R==Rampage) and they reminded me of your tales...

Kirbmarc
.
.
Posts: 10577
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 8:29 am
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#725

Post by Kirbmarc » Fri Feb 01, 2019 6:29 pm

Keating wrote:
Kirbmarc wrote:
Fri Feb 01, 2019 1:51 pm
The one where Peterson defined "truth" in a very idiosyncratic way, as "what leads to an evolutionary advantage", which is a big misconception of how evolution operates, and of what truth is.
That's what I thought you meant; so your usual "I'm so much smarter than everyone" schtick. That was literally the first time Harris and Peterson talked. Even Harris thought there was sufficient there that it was worth talking more about several times more. But no, old Kirb knows everything and what's wrong with everything, and its not worth questioning his assumptions.
Why you had to make it personal, I don't know. Maybe I touched a nerve? I don't "know everything" or are "smarter" than anyone. I'm pretty sure Peterson is far smarter than me, and he definitely knows more than me when it comes to psychology. I'm not criticizing his psychology papers, or his psychological work, just his woo-ish epistemological argument. Which IS woo-ish. And not his area of expertise, by the way, since he's not a philosopher.

Bullshit is bullshit, and doesn't become true just because someone with a PhD, or even a Nobel Prize, spouts it. Kary Mullis was a genius, invented PCR, which revolutionized molecular biology. But he's also supported lots of shitty ideas, like AIDS denialism. Are people who called him out on that smarter than him? Probably not, at least not most of them. But still. On that topic he's a crank. If people less smart than him call him out on that, are they "not questioning their assumptions" because he's so smart that he merits special treatment?

Hell, people didn't seem to object when I found out that James Blaut botched his argument that Guns, Germs and Steel "ignored" the role of sorghum, when actually there are lots of references to sorghum in G, G & S. Blaut was probably smarter than me, and certainly more competent in the field of anthropology. Yet he made a huge mistake. Did I "not question my assumptions" by pointing it out?

I don't think anyone, no matter their authority, or competence, or intelligence, is immune to bullshit.

I've been called out on things I got wrong many times (from Zwarte Piete protests to the ties between the alt-right and the alt-lite, to immigration patterns) and usually I've admitted that I was wrong pretty quickly (the exception was when Aneris called me out on the alt-right/lite thing, and I, very stupidly, made it personal, and behaved like a complete twat). I don't think I'm particularly smart, or have any special knowledge, expect maybe in my field of expertise, and even that is standard learned knowledge, it's not like I'm some sort of trailblazer or innovator.

So I don't think this post is warranted, just because I pointed out that Peterson has a crank-ish view of what "truth" is, very similar to the po-mo claptrap we all made fun of.

But well, you do you.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 16636
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#726

Post by Brive1987 » Fri Feb 01, 2019 6:35 pm

Why you had to make it personal, I don't know.
:lol: :lol:
Things have still changed in the next months. People, from Brive to Keating to Vicky Caramel to gurugeorge to even Lsuoma, started to accept far-right thinkers and far-right thoughts as the new center,

Keating
.
.
Posts: 1924
Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2015 3:18 pm
Location: South of anteater guy
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#727

Post by Keating » Fri Feb 01, 2019 6:36 pm

You were doing the humblest of humblebrags. This man is so wooish, I, Kirb, the great intellectual, can detect it immediately. I’m so good, that I could detect it even though Sam Harris, also an intellectual lightweight compared to me, couldn’t. You do that kind of argumentation lol the time. It’s tiresome.

Kirbmarc
.
.
Posts: 10577
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 8:29 am
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#728

Post by Kirbmarc » Fri Feb 01, 2019 6:45 pm

Keating wrote: You were doing the humblest of humblebrags. This man is so wooish, I, Kirb, the great intellectual, can detect it immediately. I’m so good, that I could detect it even though Sam Harris, also an intellectual lightweight compared to me, couldn’t. You do that kind of argumentation lol the time. It’s tiresome.
Uh?

Sam Harris definitely called Peterson out on his woo during the talk and after it. Indeed my argument was simply repeating some of the arguments that Harris used, in a more streamlined fashion since I had the benefit of time instead of doing a live debate.

Kirbmarc
.
.
Posts: 10577
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 8:29 am
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#729

Post by Kirbmarc » Fri Feb 01, 2019 6:51 pm

Brive1987 wrote:
Why you had to make it personal, I don't know.
:lol: :lol:
Things have still changed in the next months. People, from Brive to Keating to Vicky Caramel to gurugeorge to even Lsuoma, started to accept far-right thinkers and far-right thoughts as the new center,
Brive1987 wrote:
Why you had to make it personal, I don't know.
:lol: :lol:
Things have still changed in the next months. People, from Brive to Keating to Vicky Caramel to gurugeorge to even Lsuoma, started to accept far-right thinkers and far-right thoughts as the new center,
That's not personal. I've specified which far-right thinkers and far-right ideas many times, and also why they're far-right. It's about your ideas, not you as people. If someone criticizes Christianity, is he attacking Christians personally? What about islam and muslims?

Keating didn't argue about my ideas, he didn't say why he thought that my argument about Peterson was wrong. He simply accused me of being an arrogant know-it-all asshole. Which is fine, I guess, if that's what he thinks, but it's beside the point of whether Peterson is spouting woo or not.

John D
.
.
Posts: 4559
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2012 4:23 am
Location: Detroit, MI. USA
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#730

Post by John D » Fri Feb 01, 2019 6:56 pm

Keating wrote: You were doing the humblest of humblebrags. This man is so wooish, I, Kirb, the great intellectual, can detect it immediately. I’m so good, that I could detect it even though Sam Harris, also an intellectual lightweight compared to me, couldn’t. You do that kind of argumentation lol the time. It’s tiresome.
Kirb is the smartest person I know..... just ask him!

Kirbmarc
.
.
Posts: 10577
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 8:29 am
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#731

Post by Kirbmarc » Fri Feb 01, 2019 7:01 pm

John D wrote:
Keating wrote: You were doing the humblest of humblebrags. This man is so wooish, I, Kirb, the great intellectual, can detect it immediately. I’m so good, that I could detect it even though Sam Harris, also an intellectual lightweight compared to me, couldn’t. You do that kind of argumentation lol the time. It’s tiresome.
Kirb is the smartest person I know..... just ask him!
Meh. I'm just a lib-tard.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 16636
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#732

Post by Brive1987 » Fri Feb 01, 2019 7:04 pm

When I define you by your “lib-tard” views I’m obviously criticising lib-tardism. Not you.

Nothing personal.

Kirbmarc
.
.
Posts: 10577
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 8:29 am
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#733

Post by Kirbmarc » Fri Feb 01, 2019 7:11 pm

Brive1987 wrote: When I define you by your “lib-tard” views I’m obviously criticising lib-tardism. Not you.

Nothing personal.
I didn't call you a retard. I simply said that you were supporting some far-right ideas and far-right thinkers. Which is true, since you're supporting Lauren Southern, Faith Goldy, and others like BlackPigeonSpeaks. Or since you were nodding along a pastiche of alt-right ideas during the HateFacts saga.

But no, I didn't actually think that you had it against me personally, only that the "lib-tard" label was a sign of you dismissing an entire set of socio-political ideas as retarded. As you said repeatedly when you explained that you dismissed all the left (while calling for nuance between the alt-right and the alt-lite).

Keating's outburst is far more personal. Again, I'm not mad. I've learned from my Aneris fiasco to give less weight to stuff posted here, and Keating didn't put my avatar among a bunch of neo-nazi references.

I can accept that he thinks I'm an arrogant, know it all cunt. It just came out of nowhere.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 16636
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#734

Post by Brive1987 » Fri Feb 01, 2019 7:12 pm

http://i.imgur.com/P9CYMvJ.jpg
Brive to Keating to Vicky Caramel to gurugeorge to even Lsuoma, started to accept far-right thinkers and far-right thoughts
You’re lucky FT didn’t ban your ass! :lol: :lol:

Oh wait ....

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 16636
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#735

Post by Brive1987 » Fri Feb 01, 2019 7:20 pm

Or since you were nodding along a pastiche of alt-right ideas during the HateFacts saga.
It’s hilarious you keep digging for a win with HateFacts. I kept my mouth shut in favour of watching for the long anticipated (authoritative) wet-lib counter arguments.

Which, from memory, was more of a wet-noodle moment.

HateFacts only earns its Wiki entry for your ban. Which reflected (apparently for the second time) your ingrained indifference to admin mandated rules and norms.

A bit like Watson on the JREF board.

I think it best we never talk of this again. :lol:

Keating
.
.
Posts: 1924
Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2015 3:18 pm
Location: South of anteater guy
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#736

Post by Keating » Fri Feb 01, 2019 7:21 pm

There’s nothing personal here, I still appreciate your contribution when you actually engage. I just find the argument style you’ve been employing tedious.

“Who is Peterson?”
Kirb: “Think Deepak Chopra, wooiest of the woo.”
Keating: Slight push back.
Kirb: “Well, actually he’s probably smarter than me, I just disagree with him in this one area.”

You don’t actually engage any real points in the National Identity thread, just take cheap shots at Brive. Albeit, you aren’t the worst when it comes to well poisoning in that thread. But anyone who disagrees with you is “far-right”.

A few weeks ago when you complained that some people had you on ignore, I tried to subtly ask you if it was because you were arrogant and never questioned your assumptions. As far as I’m aware, only Lusoma has said they have you blocked, and it is for the reason I suggested.

But, no. I’m sure it’s just because I want to gas the kikes. That could be the only reason someone couldn’t immediately see your brilliance.

Kirbmarc
.
.
Posts: 10577
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 8:29 am
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#737

Post by Kirbmarc » Fri Feb 01, 2019 7:22 pm

Brive1987 wrote: http://i.imgur.com/P9CYMvJ.jpg
Brive to Keating to Vicky Caramel to gurugeorge to even Lsuoma, started to accept far-right thinkers and far-right thoughts
You’re lucky FT didn’t ban your ass! :lol: :lol:

Oh wait ....
From wikipedia:
Lauren Cherie Southern (born 16 June[3] 1995) is a Canadian far-right political activist,[a] internet celebrity, YouTuber, writer and documentary film director.
More:
Aleksandr Gelyevich Dugin (Russian: Алекса́ндр Ге́льевич Ду́гин; born 7 January 1962) is a Russian political analyst and strategist known for his fascist views.[5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12]
And again:
Faith Julia Goldy (born June 8, 1989),[1] also known as Faith Goldy-Bazos,[2] is a Canadian political commentator.[3] Goldy's views have been described as far-right[a] and white nationalist.[4]
You supported these people, and their ideas.

Is wikipedia lucky not to be banned, too?

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 16636
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#738

Post by Brive1987 » Fri Feb 01, 2019 7:30 pm

“when you explained that you dismissed all the left”

Dismissed them as what? I explained the liberal social left had shared tropes which for the SJWs continued to soar and explode in stupidity.

I also explained the conservative right had shared tropes which for the hard right continued to soar and explode in stupidity.

I simply believe the conservative tropes are more collective community centric than the lefts (which are focused on “muh individuality”). And that the right’s tropes are not culturally in the ascendant (Trump not withstanding) - and I’d like to address that please.

You don’t get this. And that’s why I’d never call you a “know it all”.

Kirbmarc
.
.
Posts: 10577
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 8:29 am
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#739

Post by Kirbmarc » Fri Feb 01, 2019 7:31 pm

Keating wrote: There’s nothing personal here, I still appreciate your contribution when you actually engage. I just find the argument style you’ve been employing tedious.

“Who is Peterson?”
Kirb: “Think Deepak Chopra, wooiest of the woo.”
Keating: Slight push back.
Kirb: “Well, actually he’s probably smarter than me, I just disagree with him in this one area.”

You don’t actually engage any real points in the National Identity thread, just take cheap shots at Brive. Albeit, you aren’t the worst when it comes to well poisoning in that thread. But anyone who disagrees with you is “far-right”.

A few weeks ago when you complained that some people had you on ignore, I tried to subtly ask you if it was because you were arrogant and never questioned your assumptions. As far as I’m aware, only Lusoma has said they have you blocked, and it is for the reason I suggested.

But, no. I’m sure it’s just because I want to gas the kikes. That could be the only reason someone couldn’t immediately see your brilliance.
Deepak Chopra is smart. He's very good at selling his woo and at getting interviewed and promoted by big movers and shakers. That takes brains. This doesn't mean that what he's saying is not woo. Same with Peterson.

Harris actually called him out on his weird concept of "truth", both during and after the talk.
The resulting exchange, however, was not what our mutual fans were hoping for. Rather than discuss religion and atheism, or the relationship between science and ethics, we spent two hours debating what it means to say that a proposition is (or seems to be) “true.” This is a not trivial problem in philosophy. But the place at which Peterson and I got stuck was a strange one. He seemed to be claiming that any belief system compatible with our survival must be true, and any that gets us killed must be false. As I tried to show, this view makes no sense, and I couldn’t quite convince myself that Peterson actually held it. The response on social media suggests that most listeners found our exchange as perplexing and frustrating as I did.
However, the fact that some values lie at the foundation of our scientific worldview does not suggest that all scientific truth claims can be judged on the basis of the single (Darwinian) criterion of whether the claimants survive long enough to breed. On the contrary, this assertion is quite obviously false (as I believe I demonstrated throughout our podcast). We can easily imagine our species being outcompeted by one that has no understanding whatsoever of the cosmos. Would a lethal swarm of disease-bearing insects possess a worldview superior to our own by virtue of eradicating us? The question answers itself—because no insect could even pose it. Mere survival doesn’t suggest anything about the intellectual or ethical achievement of the survivors.

Keating
.
.
Posts: 1924
Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2015 3:18 pm
Location: South of anteater guy
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#740

Post by Keating » Fri Feb 01, 2019 7:33 pm

I rest my case.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 16636
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#741

Post by Brive1987 » Fri Feb 01, 2019 7:35 pm

I’ll go with the Oxford definition over random left tinged Wiki entries. There is a reason the term alt-lite was termed. And social conservative. And nationalist.

Same reason there are 25 different versions of “liberalism”.

It’s because the world is far more nuanced than your buckets allow.

John D
.
.
Posts: 4559
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2012 4:23 am
Location: Detroit, MI. USA
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#742

Post by John D » Fri Feb 01, 2019 7:36 pm

Sam Harris and his LSD induced mediation new-age interpretation of consciousness is more woo than anything Peterson says..... discuss....

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 16636
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#743

Post by Brive1987 » Fri Feb 01, 2019 7:42 pm

I’m ending my inputs here for this particular conversation.

free thoughtpolice
.
.
Posts: 10313
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 4:27 pm
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#744

Post by free thoughtpolice » Fri Feb 01, 2019 7:53 pm

From notable hate crime cases since 1970:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_spee ... _in_Canada
Section 318: Advocating genocide
Mugesera v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) (2005)
The Supreme Court of Canada considered the meaning of the offence of advocating genocide in a deportation case, Mugesera v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration). The individual was an immigrant from Rwanda. The Court found that he was a member of a hard-line Hutu party, and that he had made a speech during the Rwandan genocide, calling for his listeners to exterminate members of the Tutsi ethnic group. The Court found that would constitute the offence of advocating genocide under s. 318, if it had occurred in Canada, and therefore met the legal standard for deporting the individual.[17]
There was another one that was directed against a muslim that was glorifying jihad and suicide bombings IIRC. that got convicted.
Most of the neo nazi goofs get off because they are cagey enough to not do direct incitement.
Most "hate crimes" in Canada are vandalism from goofy people spray painting graveyards and temple/churches. In my hood it used to be a few losers blowing up the mailbox outside the local Jehovah Witness Kingdom Hall.
I don't think Faithnews Goldy has anything to worry about unless she directly incites a crime and she knows it. The hate crime laws have been in place for 50 years and charges for hate speech are few and convictions even fewer.
There has been a debate about the boundaries of hate speech law since the introduction, and admittedly there is always a blurry line between political discourse and direct incitement to commit a crime, but FG isn't being honest about what is really going on.
It is sad that so many people get their viewpoints formed by these internet grifters and crackpots.

Kirbmarc
.
.
Posts: 10577
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 8:29 am
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#745

Post by Kirbmarc » Fri Feb 01, 2019 7:56 pm

Brive1987 wrote: I simply believe the conservative tropes are more collective community centric than the lefts (which are focused on “muh individuality”). And that the right’s tropes are not culturally in the ascendant (Trump not withstanding) - and I’d like to address that please.

You don’t get this. And that’s why I’d never call you a “know it all”.
Well, you usually don't put it this way, since most of what you do is to attribute the cause of some issues to "civic nationalism" (sometimes "beige civic nationalism"). But anyway. You often say that "wet liberals" of the center-left are basically enabling the SocJus. The libertarian ight is actually very big about individual rights and freedoms. You're more focused on cultural collectives. You're clearly not a right libertarian.

And you're not just focused on religious/cultural conservatism as preserving some traditional values. You're very much interested in curbing immigration from some areas of the world into Australia (less so from others) in the name of preserving a cultural collective. You've made many infographics about the changes in immigration, with a focus on the changes of the ethnicity of the immigrants, which you are think are a threat to the cultural collective if they come from some areas (less so from others).

Again, I don't think you're in the same boat of the racial purity people. You're fine with some Chinese or Indians around. You simply think that there is too many of them, that they don't assimilate (or not enough) to preserve something you deem important, and you want to curb their numbers to avoid the loss of a cultural identity you deem important. That's usually a far-right political theme, even if it's not "blood and soil" or "one drop" racialism.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 16636
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#746

Post by Brive1987 » Fri Feb 01, 2019 8:24 pm

Don’t piss CFB off Kirb. Even if he has a sweet spot for you.

;)

viewtopic.php?f=29&t=544&p=483821#p483821

Mr. X, Indeed
.
.
Posts: 355
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 7:52 pm
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#747

Post by Mr. X, Indeed » Fri Feb 01, 2019 8:57 pm

The inventor of ibuprofen died.

https://www.militarytimes.com/off-duty/ ... ies-at-95/

I remember being prescribed Motrin when I had my wisdom teeth out while in the navy.

Bhurzum
Brassy, uncouth, henpecked meathead
Posts: 3952
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 2:08 am
Location: Lurking in a dumpster
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#748

Post by Bhurzum » Fri Feb 01, 2019 9:19 pm

Lsuoma wrote: Burzho - I got that Officers' Reading Club book, and I'm enjoying it a lot. I also got a couple of books about B.A.O.R. (in this case R==Rampage) and they reminded me of your tales...
Ah, early BAOR - the days of SOXMIS*, crash-outs to the survival area, drinking with Russian hookers (I could write a book on this if I had the writing skills) and playing cat & mouse with English infantry whilst out on the piss. Bracing stuff and instrumental in making me the shaved-ape I am today.


*SOXMIS - the first of many things which highlighted how truly retarded military logic (and global politics) can be. Seriously, the dumb shit we had to endure was Python-esque.

Lsuoma
Fascist Tit
Posts: 10612
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 5:58 pm
Location: Punggye-ri
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#749

Post by Lsuoma » Fri Feb 01, 2019 9:24 pm


Bhurzum
Brassy, uncouth, henpecked meathead
Posts: 3952
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 2:08 am
Location: Lurking in a dumpster
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#750

Post by Bhurzum » Fri Feb 01, 2019 10:10 pm

SOXMIS was weaponised laziness and an exercise in job-justification. When spotted, the SOXMIS car(s) would speed off, the entire garrison would go onto high alert (nobody goes home that night) and the guards would be quadrupled. After a day or two, things would simmer down to normal, standard routine would return then boom! SOXMIS vehicle spotted on the edges of the garrison.

Rinse/repeat. Constantly. For years.

I swear to fuck, it would have been a sorry Ruskie if we ever got our mitts on him! "Never use force" my fucking arse! Cunt would have eyes like a panda and teeth like a Bosnian highstreet.

SM1957
.
.
Posts: 841
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2017 5:01 am
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#751

Post by SM1957 » Fri Feb 01, 2019 11:37 pm

Burning question of the day.

Is the Democrat Governor of Virginia the one in the black face or the one in the KKK costume?

MarcusAu
.
.
Posts: 7063
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2016 11:49 am
Location: Llareggub
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#752

Post by MarcusAu » Sat Feb 02, 2019 3:47 am

John D wrote: Sam Harris and his LSD induced mediation new-age interpretation of consciousness is more woo than anything Peterson says..... discuss....
Psychedelics are a 'kind of' evidence for the supernatural.

Everyone is religious (for a given value of religion).


For both Peterson and Harris - I don't recommend swallowing their ideas whole but taking the time to chew them over first.

Hunt
.
.
Posts: 3054
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 5:04 am
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#753

Post by Hunt » Sat Feb 02, 2019 4:03 am

Just trust me on this one...


mike150160
.
.
Posts: 136
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 1:17 am
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#754

Post by mike150160 » Sat Feb 02, 2019 4:45 am

Hunt wrote: Just trust me on this one...

you're a bad bad person of gender

DrokkIt
.
.
Posts: 1327
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 4:01 pm
Location: Brit-Cit
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#755

Post by DrokkIt » Sat Feb 02, 2019 4:58 am

Keating wrote:
Thu Jan 31, 2019 3:01 pm
Kirbmarc wrote: But you only need to listen to Jordy-boy's interview with Sam Harriss to realize how confused and woo-ish his ideas are. Think Deepak Chopra on steroids.
The central disagreement between them is one that I think Peterson is right on: you can't build a moral framework just from facts. Harris thinks you can.
I don't think this is the central disagreement, having listened to all of their discussions.

I think it's something more like Peterson thinks objective truth is subordinate to (what he conceives as) 'wisdom', and he has a novel evolutionary justification for this.
Harris thinks this is flawed and that 'truth' (in the empirical sense) is subordinate to factual events. He has the standard materialist justification for this.

Peterson's observations appeal to some, but I find them highly selective and predicated on traditions to the point of him slipping into apologia.

John D
.
.
Posts: 4559
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2012 4:23 am
Location: Detroit, MI. USA
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#756

Post by John D » Sat Feb 02, 2019 7:03 am

DrokkIt wrote:
Keating wrote:
Thu Jan 31, 2019 3:01 pm
Kirbmarc wrote: But you only need to listen to Jordy-boy's interview with Sam Harriss to realize how confused and woo-ish his ideas are. Think Deepak Chopra on steroids.
The central disagreement between them is one that I think Peterson is right on: you can't build a moral framework just from facts. Harris thinks you can.
I don't think this is the central disagreement, having listened to all of their discussions.

I think it's something more like Peterson thinks objective truth is subordinate to (what he conceives as) 'wisdom', and he has a novel evolutionary justification for this.
Harris thinks this is flawed and that 'truth' (in the empirical sense) is subordinate to factual events. He has the standard materialist justification for this.

Peterson's observations appeal to some, but I find them highly selective and predicated on traditions to the point of him slipping into apologia.
The "capital T Truth" discussion between these two is really unproductive. Peterson makes up a weird definition for truth.... one of my complaints about him. I think he holds a view that some kind of subconscious and unknowable force is the stuff that should be considered "True". I agree with Harris that this is a kind of silly pedantic exercise.

Where I agree with Peterson is in how he points out that no one really acts like they are an atheist. I do not think people can build a moral framework or any sense of motivation by using simple "facts" or lower case truth. This is where I think Harris and Dawkins etc. get it wrong. Pragmatism is a useful exercise but it turns into some kind of hell if taken to its logical end.

Bhurzum
Brassy, uncouth, henpecked meathead
Posts: 3952
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 2:08 am
Location: Lurking in a dumpster
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#757

Post by Bhurzum » Sat Feb 02, 2019 7:06 am

mike150160 wrote:
Hunt wrote: Just trust me on this one...

you're a bad bad person of gender
Rule #34 don't fail me now...

screwtape
.
.
Posts: 2325
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 7:15 am
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#758

Post by screwtape » Sat Feb 02, 2019 7:23 am

Pretty hard to disagree with Peterson in this matter:
https://nationalpost.com/opinion/jordan ... ys-and-men

ThreeFlangedJavis
.
.
Posts: 1328
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:13 am
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#759

Post by ThreeFlangedJavis » Sat Feb 02, 2019 7:43 am

Kirbmarc wrote:
Fri Feb 01, 2019 6:29 pm
Keating wrote:
Kirbmarc wrote:
Fri Feb 01, 2019 1:51 pm
The one where Peterson defined "truth" in a very idiosyncratic way, as "what leads to an evolutionary advantage", which is a big misconception of how evolution operates, and of what truth is.
That's what I thought you meant; so your usual "I'm so much smarter than everyone" schtick. That was literally the first time Harris and Peterson talked. Even Harris thought there was sufficient there that it was worth talking more about several times more. But no, old Kirb knows everything and what's wrong with everything, and its not worth questioning his assumptions.
Why you had to make it personal, I don't know. Maybe I touched a nerve? I don't "know everything" or are "smarter" than anyone. I'm pretty sure Peterson is far smarter than me, and he definitely knows more than me when it comes to psychology. I'm not criticizing his psychology papers, or his psychological work, just his woo-ish epistemological argument. Which IS woo-ish. And not his area of expertise, by the way, since he's not a philosopher.

Bullshit is bullshit, and doesn't become true just because someone with a PhD, or even a Nobel Prize, spouts it. Kary Mullis was a genius, invented PCR, which revolutionized molecular biology. But he's also supported lots of shitty ideas, like AIDS denialism. Are people who called him out on that smarter than him? Probably not, at least not most of them. But still. On that topic he's a crank. If people less smart than him call him out on that, are they "not questioning their assumptions" because he's so smart that he merits special treatment?

Hell, people didn't seem to object when I found out that James Blaut botched his argument that Guns, Germs and Steel "ignored" the role of sorghum, when actually there are lots of references to sorghum in G, G & S. Blaut was probably smarter than me, and certainly more competent in the field of anthropology. Yet he made a huge mistake. Did I "not question my assumptions" by pointing it out?

I don't think anyone, no matter their authority, or competence, or intelligence, is immune to bullshit.

I've been called out on things I got wrong many times (from Zwarte Piete protests to the ties between the alt-right and the alt-lite, to immigration patterns) and usually I've admitted that I was wrong pretty quickly (the exception was when Aneris called me out on the alt-right/lite thing, and I, very stupidly, made it personal, and behaved like a complete twat). I don't think I'm particularly smart, or have any special knowledge, expect maybe in my field of expertise, and even that is standard learned knowledge, it's not like I'm some sort of trailblazer or innovator.

So I don't think this post is warranted, just because I pointed out that Peterson has a crank-ish view of what "truth" is, very similar to the po-mo claptrap we all made fun of.

But well, you do you.
Kirbmarc wrote:He's a woo peddler who happens to be charismatic enough for a lot of people to like him.

He also had the good luck of squaring off against a pipsqueak who was trying to argue that "basically, there's no such thing as biological sex."

But you only need to listen to Jordy-boy's interview with Sam Harriss to realize how confused and woo-ish his ideas are. Think Deepak Chopra on steroids.

Still, at least he's better than the alt-righters. If Oprah can have a TV show with Dr. Phil, perhaps there's room for Dr. Peterson, too.
Not easy to read that as saying anything other than that "Jordy-boy" is JUST a woo peddler worse than Chopra, which seems quite an extreme and ill-considered thing to say. His overall message is anti-extremist and centred on individual self-betterment with his own actual clinical experience and the body of psychological research to back it up. The fact that he can get fooled by Bjorn Lomborg just makes him flawed like the rest of us.

John D
.
.
Posts: 4559
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2012 4:23 am
Location: Detroit, MI. USA
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#760

Post by John D » Sat Feb 02, 2019 7:50 am

screwtape wrote: Pretty hard to disagree with Peterson in this matter:
https://nationalpost.com/opinion/jordan ... ys-and-men
Exactly.... while Peterson has flaws he more often hits a home run. We could use more like him. I posted this editorial on my Facebook with the comment that masculinity is only toxic when taken to harmful extremes.... and that we will regret the attack on manhood. (More shit for my daughter to hate about me I guess).

DaveDodo007
.
.
Posts: 1321
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2012 12:48 pm
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#761

Post by DaveDodo007 » Sat Feb 02, 2019 8:40 am

Kirbmarc wrote:
Fri Feb 01, 2019 1:14 pm


WTF I love Peterson now :lol:

Triggered much, Dave?
You should subscribe to his patreon then. How is a Champagne Marxist Jungian Christian going to survive on $80,000 a month plus book royalties.

DaveDodo007
.
.
Posts: 1321
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2012 12:48 pm
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#762

Post by DaveDodo007 » Sat Feb 02, 2019 8:45 am

MarcusAu wrote: I see that |Jeremy Hardy died recently at the age of 57.

Next time I am out Dorchester way I will make a point of going out to visit his house to see where he wrote 'Tess of the D'Urbervilles'

I'd type more but I'm sorry I haven't a clue what I'm talking about.
Best to be far from the madding crowd.

mike150160
.
.
Posts: 136
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 1:17 am
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#763

Post by mike150160 » Sat Feb 02, 2019 9:09 am

ThreeFlangedJavis wrote:
Kirbmarc wrote:
Fri Feb 01, 2019 6:29 pm
Keating wrote:
Kirbmarc wrote:
Fri Feb 01, 2019 1:51 pm
The one where Peterson defined "truth" in a very idiosyncratic way, as "what leads to an evolutionary advantage", which is a big misconception of how evolution operates, and of what truth is.

That's what I thought you meant; so your usual "I'm so much smarter than everyone" schtick. That was literally the first time Harris and Peterson talked. Even Harris thought there was sufficient there that it was worth talking more about several times more. But no, old Kirb knows everything and what's wrong with everything, and its not worth questioning his assumptions.
Why you had to make it personal, I don't know. Maybe I touched a nerve? I don't "know everything" or are "smarter" than anyone. I'm pretty sure Peterson is far smarter than me, and he definitely knows more than me when it comes to psychology. I'm not criticizing his psychology papers, or his psychological work, just his woo-ish epistemological argument. Which IS woo-ish. And not his area of expertise, by the way, since he's not a philosopher.

Bullshit is bullshit, and doesn't become true just because someone with a PhD, or even a Nobel Prize, spouts it. Kary Mullis was a genius, invented PCR, which revolutionized molecular biology. But he's also supported lots of shitty ideas, like AIDS denialism. Are people who called him out on that smarter than him? Probably not, at least not most of them. But still. On that topic he's a crank. If people less smart than him call him out on that, are they "not questioning their assumptions" because he's so smart that he merits special treatment?

Hell, people didn't seem to object when I found out that James Blaut botched his argument that Guns, Germs and Steel "ignored" the role of sorghum, when actually there are lots of references to sorghum in G, G & S. Blaut was probably smarter than me, and certainly more competent in the field of anthropology. Yet he made a huge mistake. Did I "not question my assumptions" by pointing it out?

I don't think anyone, no matter their authority, or competence, or intelligence, is immune to bullshit.

I've been called out on things I got wrong many times (from Zwarte Piete protests to the ties between the alt-right and the alt-lite, to immigration patterns) and usually I've admitted that I was wrong pretty quickly (the exception was when Aneris called me out on the alt-right/lite thing, and I, very stupidly, made it personal, and behaved like a complete twat). I don't think I'm particularly smart, or have any special knowledge, expect maybe in my field of expertise, and even that is standard learned knowledge, it's not like I'm some sort of trailblazer or innovator.

So I don't think this post is warranted, just because I pointed out that Peterson has a crank-ish view of what "truth" is, very similar to the po-mo claptrap we all made fun of.

But well, you do you.
Kirbmarc wrote:He's a woo peddler who happens to be charismatic enough for a lot of people to like him.

He also had the good luck of squaring off against a pipsqueak who was trying to argue that "basically, there's no such thing as biological sex."

But you only need to listen to Jordy-boy's interview with Sam Harriss to realize how confused and woo-ish his ideas are. Think Deepak Chopra on steroids.

Still, at least he's better than the alt-righters. If Oprah can have a TV show with Dr. Phil, perhaps there's room for Dr. Peterson, too.
Not easy to read that as saying anything other than that "Jordy-boy" is JUST a woo peddler worse than Chopra, which seems quite an extreme and ill-considered thing to say. His overall message is anti-extremist and centred on individual self-betterment with his own actual clinical experience and the body of psychological research to back it up. The fact that he can get fooled by Bjorn Lomborg just makes him flawed like the rest of us.
That seemed a bit of a jump: Where on the doll did Bjorn touch you?

fafnir
.
.
Posts: 38
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2015 6:16 pm
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#764

Post by fafnir » Sat Feb 02, 2019 9:20 am

ThreeFlangedJavis wrote: So I don't think this post is warranted, just because I pointed out that Peterson has a crank-ish view of what "truth" is, very similar to the po-mo claptrap we all made fun of.
He does tend to go on rather. I'm not sure that he is as crankish as he appears when he's talking to Harris, who doesn't seem to me to have understood him on this. As far as I can gather his point is that Harris sees truth as being about rules and facts that are derived from reason. Peterson sees that as fatally limited. Much of what we see in the progressive project (and other places besides) are attempts to rebuild the world on either rationalism, or some new ideal. In one of his discussions he talks about expert systems. How much harder it is to write an artificial intelligence based on explicit rules and facts than people thought at first though. Some of that is because the real world is very complicated. He sees Harris's rationistic morality as that kind of project. It's too narrow and simplistic to actually work. Instead what often works are systems that learn from experience, encoding that experience into themselves in ways that make it very hard for us to explicitly see the rules - neural nets being the classic example. To some degree those learning systems are encoding true facts and rules about the world in ways that make it hard for us to see, but are better than systems where the facts and rules and rationality are more obvious. He compares that to the traditions, stories and ways of living of a culture. They are ways of encoding truths about the world that are often deeper than Harris's truths. We have the traditions, and stories and ways of living of cultures that have survived. Many of them have survived in cultures for thousands of years. From an evolutionary point of view, their view of the world has been tested in many vastly different contexts and been found at least not to be deadly cultural poison. Of course the world changes, and what works changes... His conclusion is that people who think they can throw out the old in culture and replace it with something new, are often naive and frequently cause considerable harm that they did not anticipate because they don't really understand what they are doing, or why what they were throwing out worked.

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 12366
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#765

Post by Matt Cavanaugh » Sat Feb 02, 2019 9:50 am

h/t WEIT, outrage & abuse on Young Twitter forces 18yo Chinese immigrant author forced to cancel publication of her new fantasy novel. Her crime? Describing the heroine's skin as "colored like the bronze of their sands at sunset."

https://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-a ... ing-career

We've created a generation of monsters.

ThreeFlangedJavis
.
.
Posts: 1328
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:13 am
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#766

Post by ThreeFlangedJavis » Sat Feb 02, 2019 10:23 am

mike150160 wrote:
Sat Feb 02, 2019 9:09 am
ThreeFlangedJavis wrote:
Kirbmarc wrote:
Fri Feb 01, 2019 6:29 pm
Keating wrote:
Kirbmarc wrote:
Fri Feb 01, 2019 1:51 pm
The one where Peterson defined "truth" in a very idiosyncratic way, as "what leads to an evolutionary advantage", which is a big misconception of how evolution operates, and of what truth is.

That's what I thought you meant; so your usual "I'm so much smarter than everyone" schtick. That was literally the first time Harris and Peterson talked. Even Harris thought there was sufficient there that it was worth talking more about several times more. But no, old Kirb knows everything and what's wrong with everything, and its not worth questioning his assumptions.
Why you had to make it personal, I don't know. Maybe I touched a nerve? I don't "know everything" or are "smarter" than anyone. I'm pretty sure Peterson is far smarter than me, and he definitely knows more than me when it comes to psychology. I'm not criticizing his psychology papers, or his psychological work, just his woo-ish epistemological argument. Which IS woo-ish. And not his area of expertise, by the way, since he's not a philosopher.

Bullshit is bullshit, and doesn't become true just because someone with a PhD, or even a Nobel Prize, spouts it. Kary Mullis was a genius, invented PCR, which revolutionized molecular biology. But he's also supported lots of shitty ideas, like AIDS denialism. Are people who called him out on that smarter than him? Probably not, at least not most of them. But still. On that topic he's a crank. If people less smart than him call him out on that, are they "not questioning their assumptions" because he's so smart that he merits special treatment?

Hell, people didn't seem to object when I found out that James Blaut botched his argument that Guns, Germs and Steel "ignored" the role of sorghum, when actually there are lots of references to sorghum in G, G & S. Blaut was probably smarter than me, and certainly more competent in the field of anthropology. Yet he made a huge mistake. Did I "not question my assumptions" by pointing it out?

I don't think anyone, no matter their authority, or competence, or intelligence, is immune to bullshit.

I've been called out on things I got wrong many times (from Zwarte Piete protests to the ties between the alt-right and the alt-lite, to immigration patterns) and usually I've admitted that I was wrong pretty quickly (the exception was when Aneris called me out on the alt-right/lite thing, and I, very stupidly, made it personal, and behaved like a complete twat). I don't think I'm particularly smart, or have any special knowledge, expect maybe in my field of expertise, and even that is standard learned knowledge, it's not like I'm some sort of trailblazer or innovator.

So I don't think this post is warranted, just because I pointed out that Peterson has a crank-ish view of what "truth" is, very similar to the po-mo claptrap we all made fun of.

But well, you do you.
Kirbmarc wrote:He's a woo peddler who happens to be charismatic enough for a lot of people to like him.

He also had the good luck of squaring off against a pipsqueak who was trying to argue that "basically, there's no such thing as biological sex."

But you only need to listen to Jordy-boy's interview with Sam Harriss to realize how confused and woo-ish his ideas are. Think Deepak Chopra on steroids.

Still, at least he's better than the alt-righters. If Oprah can have a TV show with Dr. Phil, perhaps there's room for Dr. Peterson, too.
Not easy to read that as saying anything other than that "Jordy-boy" is JUST a woo peddler worse than Chopra, which seems quite an extreme and ill-considered thing to say. His overall message is anti-extremist and centred on individual self-betterment with his own actual clinical experience and the body of psychological research to back it up. The fact that he can get fooled by Bjorn Lomborg just makes him flawed like the rest of us.
That seemed a bit of a jump: Where on the doll did Bjorn touch you?
It was a bit much for Peterson to have desribed Lomborg as brilliant. Lomborg's Schtick has morphed over the years into whatever position has worked for him at the time. He started out with "skeptic" tropes and has incrementally changed tack to accepting the science but arguing about economic impacts of mitigation as funding sources closed off and others became available . From all that I have read he is big on self-enrichment and attention seeking. This is Potholer54 taking a look at Lomborg on electric cars.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwMPFDqyfrA
Typical Lomborg stuff. It is designed to mislead and plays to a particular audience.

ThreeFlangedJavis
.
.
Posts: 1328
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:13 am
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#767

Post by ThreeFlangedJavis » Sat Feb 02, 2019 10:26 am

fafnir wrote:
Sat Feb 02, 2019 9:20 am
ThreeFlangedJavis wrote: So I don't think this post is warranted, just because I pointed out that Peterson has a crank-ish view of what "truth" is, very similar to the po-mo claptrap we all made fun of.
I didn't. Honest, I really didn't!

DaveDodo007
.
.
Posts: 1321
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2012 12:48 pm
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#768

Post by DaveDodo007 » Sat Feb 02, 2019 10:46 am

John D wrote:
screwtape wrote: Pretty hard to disagree with Peterson in this matter:
https://nationalpost.com/opinion/jordan ... ys-and-men
Exactly.... while Peterson has flaws he more often hits a home run. We could use more like him. I posted this editorial on my Facebook with the comment that masculinity is only toxic when taken to harmful extremes.... and that we will regret the attack on manhood. (More shit for my daughter to hate about me I guess).
He is just doing his job as gatekeeper. He knows the left have gone full retard and it is ruining any chance for his work at the UN to bear fruit. Fuck Peterson, let the left's voice be heard loud and clear. Give them enough rope, so to speak. If you haven't learnt yet that psychology is a pseudo science then I don't know what to say. Is their anything they have done that is repeatable or unfalsifiable?

ThreeFlangedJavis
.
.
Posts: 1328
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:13 am
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#769

Post by ThreeFlangedJavis » Sat Feb 02, 2019 10:54 am

fafnir wrote:
Sat Feb 02, 2019 9:20 am
ThreeFlangedJavis wrote: So I don't think this post is warranted, just because I pointed out that Peterson has a crank-ish view of what "truth" is, very similar to the po-mo claptrap we all made fun of.
He does tend to go on rather. I'm not sure that he is as crankish as he appears when he's talking to Harris, who doesn't seem to me to have understood him on this. As far as I can gather his point is that Harris sees truth as being about rules and facts that are derived from reason. Peterson sees that as fatally limited. Much of what we see in the progressive project (and other places besides) are attempts to rebuild the world on either rationalism, or some new ideal. In one of his discussions he talks about expert systems. How much harder it is to write an artificial intelligence based on explicit rules and facts than people thought at first though. Some of that is because the real world is very complicated. He sees Harris's rationistic morality as that kind of project. It's too narrow and simplistic to actually work. Instead what often works are systems that learn from experience, encoding that experience into themselves in ways that make it very hard for us to explicitly see the rules - neural nets being the classic example. To some degree those learning systems are encoding true facts and rules about the world in ways that make it hard for us to see, but are better than systems where the facts and rules and rationality are more obvious. He compares that to the traditions, stories and ways of living of a culture. They are ways of encoding truths about the world that are often deeper than Harris's truths. We have the traditions, and stories and ways of living of cultures that have survived. Many of them have survived in cultures for thousands of years. From an evolutionary point of view, their view of the world has been tested in many vastly different contexts and been found at least not to be deadly cultural poison. Of course the world changes, and what works changes... His conclusion is that people who think they can throw out the old in culture and replace it with something new, are often naive and frequently cause considerable harm that they did not anticipate because they don't really understand what they are doing, or why what they were throwing out worked.
Funny thing is, I'm not entirely sure that the Harris philosophy is incompatible with Peterson's. Harris has argued that moral good can be measured in principle in terms of the sum total of well-being or misery in the world, which in a roundabout way is similar to what Peterson is saying. I think their disagreement is really a pedantic one about the definition of truth. I think they could have saved a lot of breath by just agreeing that they are operating on different definitions of truth. I think Harris might actually agree that there are some things which we should accept as moral because of their practical effect. To me,Peterson seems to want to make his idea of fundamental utilitarian truth the Big Daddy of Truth in a way that he can't really support. IOW it isn't just a different and pragmatic truth, it somehow is more true than factual truth and I just don't get how you can say that because in principle you could derive Peterson's Truth from facts about biology. TBH they start to lose me after a while, either because they have gone off the rails or I have.

John D
.
.
Posts: 4559
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2012 4:23 am
Location: Detroit, MI. USA
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#770

Post by John D » Sat Feb 02, 2019 10:59 am

ThreeFlangedJavis wrote:
It was a bit much for Peterson to have desribed Lomborg as brilliant. Lomborg's Schtick has morphed over the years into whatever position has worked for him at the time. He started out with "skeptic" tropes and has incrementally changed tack to accepting the science but arguing about economic impacts of mitigation as funding sources closed off and others became available . From all that I have read he is big on self-enrichment and attention seeking. This is Potholer54 taking a look at Lomborg on electric cars.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwMPFDqyfrA
Typical Lomborg stuff. It is designed to mislead and plays to a particular audience.
Very few people are really being accurate and complete with their electric car analysis. So.... I will make a few points.

1) Most electrics that are studied are very low horsepower and very small. One of the worst cars I have ever driven is the Nissan Leaf. Seriously, the car is so underpowered I thought I was going to die when entering highway traffic. Basically... my point is that there are almost no gas powered cars that have as low of performance as the leaf. So... please notice that the comparisons of CO2 emissions does not compare cars of similar power and size.... just a bunch a stupid and misleading averages.

2) It is important to understand where a customer is buying their electricity when you analyze CO2. An electric car operating in the Midwest of the US is clearly making more CO2 on average because of the type of electric power plants used. Things are better for electrics in coastal areas of the US.

3) Analysis of electrics almost never take into account that batteries require replacement. This is a giant add to the CO2 footprint of the car of the average lifetime... which is approaching 15 years for gas powered cars. Electrics will need two battery replacements over this period.

Better battery technology is helping... for sure... but unless the electric generation system can become truly non CO2 producing, electrics are a non-factor in global warming.

fafnir
.
.
Posts: 38
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2015 6:16 pm
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#771

Post by fafnir » Sat Feb 02, 2019 11:29 am

ThreeFlangedJavis wrote: IOW it isn't just a different and pragmatic truth, it somehow is more true than factual truth and I just don't get how you can say that because in principle you could derive Peterson's Truth from facts about biology.
I can't see any reason why in principle one couldn't reduce Peterson's truths to truths about biology, or what ever truths it is Harris deals in. The two quibbles that come to my mind are firstly, whether in practice doing that is actually possible. If not, we are talking about philosophical abstractions and I generally think Peterson is more practically orientated than that. The other quibble is whether the way we package our morality is important? Is the same morality explained as a work of rational philosophy as impactful and useful as when it is packaged in creation myths, fairy stories, and customs? Looking at the world today, I wonder if many of us don't think we get our morality Harris's day (from rationality and evidence), but really get it Peterson's way (from tribal myths and ancient archetypes of power, struggle, corruption, purity etc...).

fafnir
.
.
Posts: 38
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2015 6:16 pm
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#772

Post by fafnir » Sat Feb 02, 2019 11:36 am

The only statement from Peterson that makes me think he believes in greater Truths, was one discussion where after dancing around the question of his belief in God in the usual way, he was asked whether he thought if all human life disappeared tomorrow God would still exist. He paused and eventually said he thought God probably would. The tricky thing for me is that he often talks about God as the abstracted idea of the ideal leader, and that connects to all of his talk of hierarchy's which I could imagine him thinking was so basic it didn't even require life to apply. He's a hard man to pin down on this question.

CaptainFluffyBunny
.
.
Posts: 7556
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 8:39 am
Location: Somewhere in the pipes
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#773

Post by CaptainFluffyBunny » Sat Feb 02, 2019 11:52 am

Brive1987 wrote: Don’t piss CFB off Kirb. Even if he has a sweet spot for you.

;)

viewtopic.php?f=29&t=544&p=483821#p483821
Not pissing me off is always a good idea, but I generally only get irritated when people are continually rude and deliberately insulting.

Wow, Kirb sure seemed to strike a nerve here. I'm gonna need a beer after all this salt.

some guy
.
.
Posts: 432
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2013 9:05 am
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#774

Post by some guy » Sat Feb 02, 2019 12:10 pm

John D wrote: Very few people are really being accurate and complete with their electric car analysis. So.... I will make a few points.

1) Most electrics that are studied are very low horsepower and very small. One of the worst cars I have ever driven is the Nissan Leaf. Seriously, the car is so underpowered I thought I was going to die when entering highway traffic. Basically... my point is that there are almost no gas powered cars that have as low of performance as the leaf. So... please notice that the comparisons of CO2 emissions does not compare cars of similar power and size.... just a bunch a stupid and misleading averages.

2) It is important to understand where a customer is buying their electricity when you analyze CO2. An electric car operating in the Midwest of the US is clearly making more CO2 on average because of the type of electric power plants used. Things are better for electrics in coastal areas of the US.

3) Analysis of electrics almost never take into account that batteries require replacement. This is a giant add to the CO2 footprint of the car of the average lifetime... which is approaching 15 years for gas powered cars. Electrics will need two battery replacements over this period.

Better battery technology is helping... for sure... but unless the electric generation system can become truly non CO2 producing, electrics are a non-factor in global warming.
You make good points, and I will add another, but I'll first note that Potholer's video was mainly pointing out the dishonesty in Lomborgs video, not making the contrarian case. He does a very good job in his main focus.

I'll also add tho, that adding an electric car (or, indeed, any electric item) to the grid essentially uses electricity from their marginal source, which is often a fossil fuel generator. Except in some isolated grids, 100% of the wind and solar electricity is used right away, with further demand met by nuclear, and then additional demand met by burning fossil fuels. So it's not really fair to say that an additional car draws X% renewable and Y% fossil fuel (based on the current X/Y percent for that grid); it's more like 100% fossil fuel. Which means a larger carbon footprint for the electric car than typically estimated.

some guy
.
.
Posts: 432
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2013 9:05 am
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#775

Post by some guy » Sat Feb 02, 2019 12:10 pm

John D wrote: Very few people are really being accurate and complete with their electric car analysis. So.... I will make a few points.

1) Most electrics that are studied are very low horsepower and very small. One of the worst cars I have ever driven is the Nissan Leaf. Seriously, the car is so underpowered I thought I was going to die when entering highway traffic. Basically... my point is that there are almost no gas powered cars that have as low of performance as the leaf. So... please notice that the comparisons of CO2 emissions does not compare cars of similar power and size.... just a bunch a stupid and misleading averages.

2) It is important to understand where a customer is buying their electricity when you analyze CO2. An electric car operating in the Midwest of the US is clearly making more CO2 on average because of the type of electric power plants used. Things are better for electrics in coastal areas of the US.

3) Analysis of electrics almost never take into account that batteries require replacement. This is a giant add to the CO2 footprint of the car of the average lifetime... which is approaching 15 years for gas powered cars. Electrics will need two battery replacements over this period.

Better battery technology is helping... for sure... but unless the electric generation system can become truly non CO2 producing, electrics are a non-factor in global warming.
You make good points, and I will add another, but I'll first note that Potholer's video was mainly pointing out the dishonesty in Lomborgs video, not making the contrarian case. He does a very good job in his main focus.

I'll also add tho, that adding an electric car (or, indeed, any electric item) to the grid essentially uses electricity from their marginal source, which is often a fossil fuel generator. Except in some isolated grids, 100% of the wind and solar electricity is used right away, with further demand met by nuclear, and then additional demand met by burning fossil fuels. So it's not really fair to say that an additional car draws X% renewable and Y% fossil fuel (based on the current X/Y percent for that grid); it's more like 100% fossil fuel. Which means a larger carbon footprint for the electric car than typically estimated.

Kirbmarc
.
.
Posts: 10577
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 8:29 am
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#776

Post by Kirbmarc » Sat Feb 02, 2019 12:15 pm

DaveDodo007 wrote:
Kirbmarc wrote:
Fri Feb 01, 2019 1:14 pm


WTF I love Peterson now :lol:

Triggered much, Dave?
You should subscribe to his patreon then. How is a Champagne Marxist Jungian Christian going to survive on $80,000 a month plus book royalties.
Why should I pay for his bullshit when we can have you for free?

free thoughtpolice
.
.
Posts: 10313
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 4:27 pm
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#777

Post by free thoughtpolice » Sat Feb 02, 2019 12:15 pm

I have an idea for a new Gillette slogan.
" Throwing prostitutes off of bridges is toxic masculinity. Men need to tell other men to stop being serial murderers."
If you are listening Proctor and Gamble advertising dept., I have lots more where that came from. ;)

CaptainFluffyBunny
.
.
Posts: 7556
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 8:39 am
Location: Somewhere in the pipes
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#778

Post by CaptainFluffyBunny » Sat Feb 02, 2019 12:33 pm

Matt Cavanaugh wrote: h/t WEIT, outrage & abuse on Young Twitter forces 18yo Chinese immigrant author forced to cancel publication of her new fantasy novel. Her crime? Describing the heroine's skin as "colored like the bronze of their sands at sunset."

https://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-a ... ing-career

We've created a generation of monsters.

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 12366
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#779

Post by Matt Cavanaugh » Sat Feb 02, 2019 12:42 pm

free thoughtpolice wrote: I have an idea for a new Gillette slogan.
" Throwing prostitutes off of bridges is toxic masculinity. Men need to tell other men to stop being serial murderers."
If you are listening Proctor and Gamble advertising dept., I have lots more where that came from. ;)
Some men don't murder prostitutes, but not enough.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 16636
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#780

Post by Brive1987 » Sat Feb 02, 2019 1:23 pm

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote:
Sat Feb 02, 2019 11:52 am
Brive1987 wrote: Don’t piss CFB off Kirb. Even if he has a sweet spot for you.

;)

viewtopic.php?f=29&t=544&p=483821#p483821
Not pissing me off is always a good idea, but I generally only get irritated when people are continually rude and deliberately insulting.

Wow, Kirb sure seemed to strike a nerve here. I'm gonna need a beer after all this salt.
I was literally weeping. Almost Mykeru’ed “out”.

Though your boy seems to have a penchant for annoying regulars / admins. Be proud. Have two.

Post Reply