Nerds. Nerds EVERYWHERE...

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

If anyone's interested, from Gender Bias, here's their "Antisocial Justice Podcast" on the SJW topic of "cultural appropriation". A similar Pitcast along these lines would be pretty cool.

http://thegenderbias.com/beagrie/asjp-8 ... n-culture/

In what will either be the start of ASJP going weekly—or just an anomaly in our release schedule—it’s just Zoe and John for this show, dedicated to the latest SJW fad, Cultural Appropriation. Unfortunately, if you’re listening to this outside of “the West”, you’re appropriating culture. Stop it.

Okay, so Pit-Casting...

Does anyone have a preference for how to do multi-point calls? Some third-party podcasting hub? Google Hangout? Straight-up Skype?

And when that's settled, the best way to record the sessions?

Skype is probably best. We did a few sessions before.

[Dave]

To the moral philosophers, I'd like to ask you a hypothetical question...

Q: If you were on your way home at night, and you came through an unsurveilled alley with no witnesses present, and surprisingly , {obnoxious SJW type you hate most} came your way, would you smack the devil out of that mutha, or not ?

Not, although I can see the temptation. I should clarify that, like others, I dont really hate any of them. Pity and disgust mostly.

If I felt like fucking with those cunts, I might turn around and follow them for a couple of blocks, doing my best to lurk menacingly, but I wouldnt touch them, and I doubt I could be bothered to keep the act up for more than a couple of minutes.

[Kirbmarc]

Disrespect? Am disappointed in? Think they are doing a disservice to their communities and people they claim to support? Sure. But hate? No.

I just think they're in it over their heads and, like every extremist, become unintentionally hilarious.

I think that the biggest mistake that SJW make is that they refuse to be skeptical about their own claims, which is a big mistake to make when you're a self-described skeptic. They think that everything is a social construct made for the benefit of the Evil Priviliged People. They think that everyone who says that they're fighting the system is right, and that everyone is entitled to be mollycoddled if they have a "specialness". That's their dogma, and in defending it

But they go even further than that, and they cross the line between annoying and hilarious.

For example, they assume that neutral swear words or even tame insults have the power to influence people against some group in a negative way (which is highly debatable) and that enable people to murder others (which is batshit insane) with little to no proof.

I'm not joking. I asked why they think that the word "stupid" (one of the tamest insults in the English language) shouldn't be used. The answer (paraphrased) was: "Because if you use the word stupid as an insult you are telling people that it's OK to kill people with mental disabilities".

Yeah.

[TedDahlberg]

Living people are privileged. Do you have any idea of the suffering that "persons of death" have to endure? They're placed in a confined space, even burned in some states. They can't marry, or have a job, or even use public means of transportation (except for some that are specifically reserved for them).

Check your non-French (and various other nationalities I don't have the Fluevogs to name right now) privilege, you disgusting toad stomper. I'm just assuming that Phil is too traumatised to correct you. Dead people not allowed to marry? What about posthumous marriage, imperialist swine? Do you have any idea how many cultures you just erased?

http://i.imgur.com/du4fYQM.jpg

[piginthecity]

From a tumblr that has been going around.

ultravioletliminality:

Bullying somebody for their work is not only just as bad as stabbing somebody to death, sometimes it’s worse. I barely have any reasons to get out of bed anymore ....

Ultraliminiminimalimity is right here actually. Sometimes when I've read things here on the pit which disagree with my opinion I become literally bedridden from about half past eleven that night until seven o'clock the next morning.

[John Greg]

Jack Skeptic said:

I have a problem with them when they claim they believe in freethought and the free exchange of ideas. Carrier and Myers are fools if they think people fall for that claim and they should be called on it as often as possible. The fact they get an erection when they ban people should embarrass them. It is childish and not the action of anyone who wants to be taken seriously. Their lack of self awareness is breathtaking. They have the right to control their blogs and I have the right to laugh at them. The same goes for A+, Benson, Svan and all the other control freaks who are under the delusion they have anything relevant to say.

Yup. I agree with that too. When I say I have no problem with their actions, I mean, if they want to do that on their blog, that's their affair. If they want me to believe their claims to freethought, etc., well, then, yes, I have a problem with that. I find it pretty damned diffilcut to believe that a mouse is an elephant is a snake-in-the-grass.

I guess what I should say is that if they want to make false claims about honesty, freethought, intellectual integrity and curiousity, and a desire for "fixing" whatever's broken, while disallowing anything they don't like on their blogs, I have no problem with them being liars, fools, morons, hypocrites, and baboons, if that's how they want to roll -- if that's how they want to roll, roll on, fool.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Check your non-French (and various other nationalities I don't have the Fluevogs to name right now) privilege, you disgusting toad stomper. I'm just assuming that Phil is too traumatised to correct you. Dead people not allowed to marry? What about posthumous marriage, imperialist swine? Do you have any idea how many cultures you just erased?

I what now?

[decius]

For outstanding audio quality, the individual tracks get recorded locally and separately from communication, then uploaded to the technician responsible for mixing and post-production.
Each participant should have a proper mic, know how to set it up and how to create an environment conducive to the purpose.

This way lag never interferes and the audio doesn't get downgraded and compressed to telephone quality.

Then there's the amateur ways.

[decius]

For outstanding audio quality, the individual tracks get recorded locally and separately from communication, then uploaded to the technician responsible for mixing and post-production.
Each participant should have a proper mic, know how to set it up and how to create an environment conducive to the purpose.

This way lag never interferes and the audio doesn't get downgraded and compressed to telephone quality.

Then there's the amateur ways.

[Lsuoma]

Is there an echo in here? Someone set their mic up incorrectly, methinks.

[acathode]

To the moral philosophers, I'd like to ask you a hypothetical question...

Q: If you were on your way home at night, and you came through an unsurveilled alley with no witnesses present, and surprisingly , {obnoxious SJW type you hate most} came your way, would you smack the devil out of that mutha, or not ?

Optional: For reasons of plausible deniability,
If you're in favor of the notion, just reply / add a reference to the end of your next post, about how today's weather was beautiful.
If you're not in favor of the notion, just reply / add a reference to the end of your next post, about how today's weather was awful.

Would you, please?

Absolutely no, for the same reason I would never try beating up a neo-nazi - the right to form and hold your own opinion without being persecuted is entirely fundamental in a democracy, it's the most important democratic right by miles and miles, easily "beating" things like free speech.

Unfortunately, if I did meet the kind of SJW I hate the most, I might have to defend myself, since by far the worst SJW I know of is the kind that turn their totalitarian ideas and rhetoric into real practice - and then things start looking like this:
[youtube]-wAzFF8za-Y[/youtube]

[DeepInsideYourMind]

But why is it about being beautiful? Why are they obsessed with being beautiful??? With their fucking hashtags and their drive to be pretty and airbrushing campaigns and other bullshit.

I think you hit on something significant here. With all of these self image campaigns, they are still obsessed with the concept of beauty. It is hardly the end-all or be-all of a person. What about other positive attributes? The intellect? Sense of humor? Leadership capabilities? Artistic skills?

Not everyone will be competitive with the models in fashion magazines. So stop trying to compete on that level. Quite simply, be something else and be proud of your accomplishments.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder... one of the most true sayings ever

She may think she is beautiful, fantastic

Her husband or girlfriend may think she is beautiful, brilliant

Random strangers may think she is beautiful, yipppeee

All of the above may find her physically repulsive and sickening, well bad fucking luck


If you want other people to think something about you, you either fit in with their definition of that word, or you try to change their definitions and perceptions ... the second is nearly impossible but is the chosen SJW route (IMO usually as they have little to no chance of fitting in)

There's a last and better option, stop giving a flying fuck about who thinks you are beautiful or worthy or wonderful or amazing ... who the fuck cares ... be the person you like being, and try to be a better version of that person every day (this is who SJWs *think* they are, but it's virtually the polar opposite to most of them)

[DeepInsideYourMind]

I'ma bend your ear for a wee moment.

I'm sick of these fucking everyone is beautiful fucking things. And these "redefine" beauty things and feminist fashion and what have you.

Saw this on imgur:

The bloke on the left looks like he's just gotten a good whiff of what beauty smells like. I'm guessing pickled onions and toes.

Someone in the comments there linked to this, which made me laugh out loud.

http://i.imgur.com/hLnTGDw.jpg

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA Awesome!!!!!!!! :rimshot:

[welch]

As for an actual slymepit podcast (pitcast?) I think we have to look to our strengths.

We're fucked.

How about you just playing something metal as fuck while someone else screams like Gwar in the background?

[CuntajusRationality]

Update in Radford-Stollznow case...

Team Radford comes back swinging, with a new filing sourced from PACER and now available via links below. Included are the following two documents, filed on 5/12/14:

(a) Response and Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss
(b) Exhibit Declaration of Ben Radford

Key excerpts from the Response and Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (emphasis added, large portions removed):

I. Introduction.
This Court should deny Defendant Karen Stollznow's Motion to Dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. In her motion and affidavit, Stollznow provides the Court with a materially incomplete statement of her jurisdictional contacts with the plaintiff and this state. She characterizes her contacts with New Mexico as having been fleeting and limited to one contact more than five years ago, in 2008. In fact, defendant Stollznow's contacts with this for jurisdictional purposes, have included more than a thousand professional and personal emails, telephone calls, letters, cards and gifts directed to plaintiff Radford in New Mexico, solicitations of the plaintiff directed to him in New Mexico, professional activities conducted physically in this state and professional communications directed to the plaintiff in this state. In addition to defaming Radford on the internet with knowledge that she was causing harm to a New Mexico resident in New Mexico, Stollznow also directly communicated her false and defamatory accusations regarding Radford to Radford's employer, in a malicious effort to get him fired from his job, which he has always performed in New Mexico, as Stollznow knew. Finally, Sollznow communicated her defamatory statements to Radford's professional colleagues and others on whom he relies to make a living, in an effort to further destroy his career. Accordingly, there is more than enough to satisfy any court's standard for establishing personal jurisdiction.

All of Stollznow' s contacts with the plaintiff in this state, and her activities intended to cause Radford harm in this state are significant for jurisdictional purposes because this litigation arises in the context of a five-year professional and romantic relationship between Karen Stollznow and Ben Radford. As detailed below and in Mr. Radford's attached declaration (Exhibit A), defendant Stollznow's contacts with New Mexico, and her concerted effort to cause the plaintiff harm in this state, are far more than "minimum" and make the assertion of jurisdiction over her consistent with notions of fair play and substantial justice and to be within the reach of New Mexico's long-arm statute, NMSA 1978, § 38-1-16 (1971). Under New Mexico's decisional law, one defamatory internet posting regarding a New Mexico domiciliary, without more, may be insufficient to establish long-arm jurisdiction over a non-resident defendant. But this is a case that involves so much "more" for purposes of jurisdiction as to make the issue not a close one.

As to defendant's argument that this case should be dismissed for improper venue, defendant bases it on 28 U.S.C. § 1391. Def. Mot., P. 10-11. As explained below, §1391 is inapplicable to removed cases. Venue in removed cases is, by statute, in the federal district encompassing the state court from which the defendant removed the case. 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a).

III. ARGUMENT
Defendant has developed and sustained a consistent and long-term relationship with New Mexico through her continuous professional and personal contact with Mr. Radford. Stollznow maliciously targeted Mr. Radford in his home state, intentionally causing him harm here. Those contacts, and her intentional acts arising from them, give this Court specific jurisdiction over Defendant in the present matter.

A. This Court has Specific Jurisdiction over Defendant

i. Mr. Radford Has Made More Than a Prima Facie Showing of Minimum Contacts Necessary to Establish Specific Jurisdiction
ii. Defendant Purposefully Directed Her Conduct Toward New Mexico, with Full Knowledge that Mr. Radford is a Resident of New Mexico and that the Effects of Her Tortious Actions Would be Felt in New Mexico
iii. Defendant's Tortious Conduct Arose Directly from Her Professional and Personal Relationship with Mr. Radford
iv. Exercise of Jurisdiction over Defendant does not Offend Traditional Notions of Fair Play and Justice
v. Defendant's Request that this case be dismissed for improper venue is without a legal basis because the federal statute on which defendant relies, 28 U.S.C. § 1391, does not apply to removed cases.

CONCLUSION
Defendant seeks to reduce her conduct to a "mere" Internet post. However, an examination of her relationship with Mr. Radford over the course of five years demonstrates consistent and knowing contact with New Mexico. More significant than contact with New Mexico is the fact that Defendant targeted New Mexico by attempting to deprive Mr. Radford of not only his good name, but his employment and pay, and Mr. Radford lives and works, and has lived and worked throughout, in New Mexico. In her motion, defendant asserts, in effect, that a malefactor who defames another to his employer, to his professional colleagues and on the Internet, without somehow defaming the forum state itself, may only be sued in her home state. There is no law to support her position. Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court deny Defendant's Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and improper venue.

[rayshul]

SUSTAINED!!!!

IANAL

[Brive1987]

Invoice for services rendered: $10,249
Terms: 30 days.

[rayshul]

To the moral philosophers, I'd like to ask you a hypothetical question...

Q: If you were on your way home at night, and you came through an unsurveilled alley with no witnesses present, and surprisingly , {obnoxious SJW type you hate most} came your way, would you smack the devil out of that mutha, or not ?

No. If I believe anything it's that everyone has a right to express their views.

[Pitchguest]

Not a particularly fun day today. I woke up with some pain which later grew into almost excruciating pain so I had to take a suppository. Which of course didn't agree with me and was soon expended as quickly as it was inserted, though thankfully not until the pain had subsided. Man. Kidney stone sucks.

[Pitchguest]

Oh yeah.

Trigger warning: TMI.

[ConcentratedH2O, OM]

As for an actual slymepit podcast (pitcast?) I think we have to look to our strengths.

We're fucked.

Genuine lol! Cheers Phil! :lol: :clap:

[Dick Strawkins]

Peezus is busy today proving he is a scientific luddite and almost completely ignorant of modern genetic research.

https://web.archive.org/web/20140514213 ... -junk-dna/

He writes about a paper just published in PLOS Genetics by Palazzo and Gregory, basically a review article on junk DNA.
They make a good case that most of it is non functional - nothing too unusual there - and the criticize some overblown remarks from some people involved with the ENCODE project.

The ENCODE project, for those of you who are interested, is a multicenter research project that seeks to define all the functional parts of the human genome - basically every promoter element, enhancer, repressor and silencer.

This is a huge undertalking which has almost nothing to do with the junk DNA row. This argument has been going on for years, and speaking as someone who works in the field of transcriptional research, it is almost a non issue.
Real genomic scientists don't really care much about the question.

Yes, a few ENCODE people did make somewhat overblown claims that 80% of the genome has some kind of biological function but that kind of statement is open to different interpretations:

1. It can mean that 80% of the genome has critical sequence, the deletion of which would be either lethal or damaging.
Alternatively it can mean
2. 80% of the genome has some kind of biological effect, most of it having a slight effect, but with a small percentage having a strong effect.
The latter alternative is probably the consensus view amongst genomic researchers.
Palazzo and Gregory attack a strawman point that I have never really seen stated: "the notion that all of the DNA must have a function by virtue of its mere existence." But that's not what the functional genome people try to claim.

Myers seems to have no clue about this.
He even goes so far as to call Ewan Birney, Associate Director of the European Bioinformatics Institute a "scientist without a clue", presumably for the crime of being a key individual in the ENCODE consortium.
Birney was recently elected to Fellowship the British Royal Society - a kind of National Academy of eminent scientists.
Peezus is furious!

How does that happen? I had this fantasy that science was a meritocracy and that great scientists advanced by having deep knowledge and doing great work, but it seems another way to succeed is leap into a new field and bamboozle everyone with technology.
I am so disillusioned.

Let me help you out here Peezus.
The way you get ahead in science is by actually doing scientific research and publishing peer reviewed papers about this research.
Organizing the ENCODE consortium is a huge effort, and the development of bioinformatic tools for the analysis of the generated data is critical in the genome age.
Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean it's just there for "bamboozling people with technology".

Here's how the Royal Society described Birney's achievements:

Ewan has grown to be a force in genomics due to his innovation in genome analysis, both algorithmic and integrative analyses. He wrote the first error-tolerant, splice-aware protein alignment program, used in the human and subsequent genome analysis; he co-authored one of the first and most widely used short read assemblers. In terms of data integration, Ewan has led the analysis in many genomic consortia, in particular ENCODE, leading the integration of many genomic assays; for example making robust predictions of enhancers, promoters, and their integration with disease associated regions. He also co-developed many widely used bioinformatics resources.

That is a fantastic amount of work, with most of it having been done during a time period when Myers contribution to published peer reviewed science was a great big nothing.

Myers seems to have no knowlege that ENCODE project has been a resounding success. Almost everyone who works in transcriptional analysis finds it an enormous help in defining functional elements within the genome, targets for transcription factors, regulatory sites etc.
As I mentioned, the junk DNA question has almost zero overall importance to the overall ENCODE project. To focus on that point just reveals Myers' ignorance of the field.


By the way Peezus, I had a paper accepted for publication in PLOS Genetics last week. :D
How about you?

Slymepit 1
Pharyngula 0
:dance:

[Really?]

Update in Radford-Stollznow case...

Mega pouncetugs. Those were a fun read.

Not a particularly fun day today. I woke up with some pain which later grew into almost excruciating pain so I had to take a suppository. Which of course didn't agree with me and was soon expended as quickly as it was inserted, though thankfully not until the pain had subsided. Man. Kidney stone sucks.

Sending you healing pouncetugs.

[ERV]

PZ is just doing a 'Me too!' post to keep up appearances with the science bloggers-- Gregory, Moran, and many others have been chatting about this on FB and their science-not-drama blogs.

[James Caruthers]

I'ma bend your ear for a wee moment.

I'm sick of these fucking everyone is beautiful fucking things. And these "redefine" beauty things and feminist fashion and what have you.

Saw this on imgur:

Chick is 'redefining beauty'. And you know what, for a performance art piece, whatever. Or whatever, you wanna be an exhibitionist, IDGAF.

But why is it about being beautiful? Why are they obsessed with being beautiful??? With their fucking hashtags and their drive to be pretty and airbrushing campaigns and other bullshit.

It's so fucking... a million centuries ago, I feel like it's the female fucking dark ages where you have to be pretty or at least redefine pretty until it means you and then tell people they're misogynists if they don't think you're pretty or what the fucking ever fucking ever. And it's not about men, or attracting a mate. It's fucking I don't even fucking know.

Gnar.

It's all part of SJL cult doctrine. They deny reality and insert whatever FEELZ best to them. The victim narrative is sacred and examining privilege is praying. According to the woman who made privilege theory mainstream. Then they strawman anyone who disagrees with them to make it seem like the only people against their denial of reality and attempt to redefine words are EVIL HATERS who just want to ABUSE THE WORLD omg.

I'm not against the fat acceptance movement because I want to beat up fatties and make them kill themselves, I'm against it because they deny reality, promote the notion that fat people should ignore their doctors, tell people that doctors are a bunch of fat-shaming bigots, try to change the meanings of words to better fit their own delusions and (ironically) tell fat people it's okay to be bigoted and rude to thin people because "oh, that thin privilege was unearned, it's not like a thin person used to be fat and worked their ass off to lose the weight."

I have no problem with alcoholics being alcoholic. When they start to promote that lifestyle as healthy and desirable, while spreading hatred against non-alcoholics, then I have a problem.

http://37.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mdbjh ... o1_500.jpg

http://31.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m8ptf ... 1_1280.jpg
^If you like fat women, you're a disgusting fetishist.

If you don't like fat women, you're a disgusting misogynist. You must want to fuck little boys, because that's what thin women are like. Ugh! Thin privileged people omg!

:snooty: :snooty: :snooty:

[Really?]

So...um...there's a new video of Karen Stollznow on YouTube. Umm...

Yeah.

[youtube]hWkuB1omkpJw[/youtube]

And the comments are open...

[Dick Strawkins]

PZ is just doing a 'Me too!' post to keep up appearances with the science bloggers-- Gregory, Moran, and many others have been chatting about this on FB and their science-not-drama blogs.

I generally like Larry Moran, but he's completely obstinate on this question. I recall he went so far once as to make the claim that you could delete all the junk DNA in a human (at the same time) and not have any negative effects.
Just to give one reason why this is implausible, I think that genes that are required in a time specific manner (such as neurological genes) are going to be affected by such a severe deletion. In other words genes that have very long introns will be transcribed far quicker - but being produced at a far quicker rate than evolution has produced to date is likely to result in a negative effect.

[Brive1987]

Re vid. I get an error. More info?

[Really?]

Re vid. I get an error. More info?

Umm...Lemme try again.

[youtube]WkuB1omkpJw[/youtube]

Here's the raw link.

[James Caruthers]

I didn't see it, but Louis CK featured a plot on his sitcom that dealt with the fat shaming of women. It got a lot of praise from women viewers so of course Shakesville's McEwen has to shit all over it. (Paraphrasing) "CK just wants cookies! Why are you women giving him cookies for this and not the women who have been speaking out on this issue the whole time? Like me. WHERE'S MY COOKIES?! COOKIES!"

Honestly, why should cishest white guys bother dealing with SJW issues when they receive negative reinforcement.

It was the standard shit.

A woman baaawwwwwwwwwwws on the camera about what a hard life she has being fat, and how EASY fat guys have it for being fat. Because patriarchy. Fat guy Louis is all contrite and apologetic and takes his bitchslaps like the bitch he is.

Feminist reaction to being given everything they want?

LOOK AT THIS PIG MALE, JUST WANTS HIS COOKIES

Keep it up, feminism. Keep being toxic.

[katamari Damassi]

I'ma bend your ear for a wee moment.

I'm sick of these fucking everyone is beautiful fucking things. And these "redefine" beauty things and feminist fashion and what have you.

Saw this on imgur:

Chick is 'redefining beauty'. And you know what, for a performance art piece, whatever. Or whatever, you wanna be an exhibitionist, IDGAF.

But why is it about being beautiful? Why are they obsessed with being beautiful??? With their fucking hashtags and their drive to be pretty and airbrushing campaigns and other bullshit.

It's so fucking... a million centuries ago, I feel like it's the female fucking dark ages where you have to be pretty or at least redefine pretty until it means you and then tell people they're misogynists if they don't think you're pretty or what the fucking ever fucking ever. And it's not about men, or attracting a mate. It's fucking I don't even fucking know.

Gnar.

It's all part of SJL cult doctrine. They deny reality and insert whatever FEELZ best to them. The victim narrative is sacred and examining privilege is praying. According to the woman who made privilege theory mainstream. Then they strawman anyone who disagrees with them to make it seem like the only people against their denial of reality and attempt to redefine words are EVIL HATERS who just want to ABUSE THE WORLD omg.

I'm not against the fat acceptance movement because I want to beat up fatties and make them kill themselves, I'm against it because they deny reality, promote the notion that fat people should ignore their doctors, tell people that doctors are a bunch of fat-shaming bigots, try to change the meanings of words to better fit their own delusions and (ironically) tell fat people it's okay to be bigoted and rude to thin people because "oh, that thin privilege was unearned, it's not like a thin person used to be fat and worked their ass off to lose the weight."

I have no problem with alcoholics being alcoholic. When they start to promote that lifestyle as healthy and desirable, while spreading hatred against non-alcoholics, then I have a problem.

http://37.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mdbjh ... o1_500.jpg

http://31.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m8ptf ... 1_1280.jpg
^If you like fat women, you're a disgusting fetishist.

If you don't like fat women, you're a disgusting misogynist. You must want to fuck little boys, because that's what thin women are like. Ugh! Thin privileged people omg!

:snooty: :snooty: :snooty:

A few years ago a gaysian dude wrote to sex advice columnist Dan Savage and complained that being the one of the few gaysians where he lived, he despaired of finding love when all the men who were interested in him were rice queens-non-asian gay men who are attracted to asians. Savage's response was something along the lines of(paraphrase): "You're going to have a hard time getting laid if you'll only let men who find you unattractive fuck you. Yes it's bad if your asian-ness is the ONLY thing they find attractive about you, but what's wrong if it's one of the things they find attractive about you?"

[Sunder]

Just to give one reason why this is implausible, I think that genes that are required in a time specific manner (such as neurological genes) are going to be affected by such a severe deletion. In other words genes that have very long introns will be transcribed far quicker - but being produced at a far quicker rate than evolution has produced to date is likely to result in a negative effect.

So it's a bit like saying that the packing peanuts don't help my new television to function ergo removing them from the box before shipping shouldn't cause any problems, right?

[Really?]

Oh, come on, now. That's not cool:

http://imgur.com/UdEP3ui.jpg

[Lsuoma]

I can see two from two days ago from some dude called the only real science - both have zero views.

[KiwiInOz]

To the moral philosophers, I'd like to ask you a hypothetical question...

Q: If you were on your way home at night, and you came through an unsurveilled alley with no witnesses present, and surprisingly , {obnoxious SJW type you hate most} came your way, would you smack the devil out of that mutha, or not ?

No. If I believe anything it's that everyone has a right to express their views.

And to take a piss in that alley if it is unsurveilled.

[ROBOKiTTY]

To the moral philosophers, I'd like to ask you a hypothetical question...

Q: If you were on your way home at night, and you came through an unsurveilled alley with no witnesses present, and surprisingly , {obnoxious SJW type you hate most} came your way, would you smack the devil out of that mutha, or not ?

Optional: For reasons of plausible deniability,
If you're in favor of the notion, just reply / add a reference to the end of your next post, about how today's weather was beautiful.
If you're not in favor of the notion, just reply / add a reference to the end of your next post, about how today's weather was awful.

Would you, please?

Such dreadful weather. The heat is starting to get to me, and it's not even summer yet.

Now of course, if I had the power to control minds (for the sake of the argument, let's assume I do not and am musing about a possible world in which I did), I might make people think the weather is great.

[zenbabe]

And/or if your grant would allow for hiring a seasoned clinical research coordinator... :)

I could offer a special deal on bio-informatic services too!
:D

'Slymepit Institute' anyone?

Yes!
Need any help with the equipment? Want samples running and such on the midnight shift?
I'd even bring my own crayons.

[AndrewV69]

In other news:

One of my kids and a niece are visiting and they were scheduled to arrive earlier on. I went to the ferry to pick them up. So while I am waiting and looking I see an odd couple.

A Muslim girl in a hijab standing side by side with a skinny hipster boy complete with glasses. Now that is an unusual sight I say to myself, and then I realize I am looking at my son and my niece.

I just had to laugh.

I was teasing my son all the way home for looking like a hipster. Annoyed the crap out of him. But they both admitted that a lot of people were staring at them all day and security at the airport made her take off her shoes (they flew in from Toronto).

[James Caruthers]

A few years ago a gaysian dude wrote to sex advice columnist Dan Savage and complained that being the one of the few gaysians where he lived, he despaired of finding love when all the men who were interested in him were rice queens-non-asian gay men who are attracted to asians. Savage's response was something along the lines of(paraphrase): "You're going to have a hard time getting laid if you'll only let men who find you unattractive fuck you. Yes it's bad if your asian-ness is the ONLY thing they find attractive about you, but what's wrong if it's one of the things they find attractive about you?"

Sounds like oppression to me! :snooty:

The gaysian should have stepped onto a bus in nothing but his boxers and written "beautiful" and "check your rice-queen imperio-fascist privilege" and "not your asian fucktoy" all over his naked body.

I don't know why SJWs think it is bad to try to find people who like your "type." Most people have preferences, including the SJWs, even if they would never admit it.

[KiwiInOz]

To the moral philosophers, I'd like to ask you a hypothetical question...

Q: If you were on your way home at night, and you came through an unsurveilled alley with no witnesses present, and surprisingly , {obnoxious SJW type you hate most} came your way, would you smack the devil out of that mutha, or not ?

Optional: For reasons of plausible deniability,
If you're in favor of the notion, just reply / add a reference to the end of your next post, about how today's weather was beautiful.
If you're not in favor of the notion, just reply / add a reference to the end of your next post, about how today's weather was awful.

Would you, please?

Such dreadful weather. The heat is starting to get to me, and it's not even summer yet.

Now of course, if I had the power to control minds (for the sake of the argument, let's assume I do not and am musing about a possible world in which I did), I might make people think the weather is great.

It's a beautiful sunny morning here in Brisbane. Better go and hang the washing out before I get onto some population dynamics modelling, write up my contribution to a final report, and look for more contracts.

[Linus]

Re vid. I get an error. More info?

Umm...Lemme try again.

[youtube]WkuB1omkpJw[/youtube]

Here's the raw link.

That's about 6 months old.

[Really?]

Re vid. I get an error. More info?

Umm...Lemme try again.

[youtube]WkuB1omkpJw[/youtube]

Here's the raw link.

That's about 6 months old.

You're right. It came up when I looked for any new videos about the Stollznow/Radford/Baxter affair. Looks like "theonlyrealscience" just reposted it.

[ERV]

Re vid. I get an error. More info?

Umm...Lemme try again.

[youtube]WkuB1omkpJw[/youtube]

Here's the raw link.

That was a weird interview. She's weird, dunno how he ever got a job interviewing anyone, jebus.

Also, we know that the psychics weren't psychics because none of them pegged her as a PSYCHO.

Also, Radford is 43? Shit. Looks younger than Watson.

[Pitchguest]

I'ma bend your ear for a wee moment.

I'm sick of these fucking everyone is beautiful fucking things. And these "redefine" beauty things and feminist fashion and what have you.

Saw this on imgur:

Chick is 'redefining beauty'. And you know what, for a performance art piece, whatever. Or whatever, you wanna be an exhibitionist, IDGAF.

But why is it about being beautiful? Why are they obsessed with being beautiful??? With their fucking hashtags and their drive to be pretty and airbrushing campaigns and other bullshit.

It's so fucking... a million centuries ago, I feel like it's the female fucking dark ages where you have to be pretty or at least redefine pretty until it means you and then tell people they're misogynists if they don't think you're pretty or what the fucking ever fucking ever. And it's not about men, or attracting a mate. It's fucking I don't even fucking know.

Gnar.

It's all part of SJL cult doctrine. They deny reality and insert whatever FEELZ best to them. The victim narrative is sacred and examining privilege is praying. According to the woman who made privilege theory mainstream. Then they strawman anyone who disagrees with them to make it seem like the only people against their denial of reality and attempt to redefine words are EVIL HATERS who just want to ABUSE THE WORLD omg.

I'm not against the fat acceptance movement because I want to beat up fatties and make them kill themselves, I'm against it because they deny reality, promote the notion that fat people should ignore their doctors, tell people that doctors are a bunch of fat-shaming bigots, try to change the meanings of words to better fit their own delusions and (ironically) tell fat people it's okay to be bigoted and rude to thin people because "oh, that thin privilege was unearned, it's not like a thin person used to be fat and worked their ass off to lose the weight."

I have no problem with alcoholics being alcoholic. When they start to promote that lifestyle as healthy and desirable, while spreading hatred against non-alcoholics, then I have a problem.

http://37.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mdbjh ... o1_500.jpg

http://31.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m8ptf ... 1_1280.jpg
^If you like fat women, you're a disgusting fetishist.

If you don't like fat women, you're a disgusting misogynist. You must want to fuck little boys, because that's what thin women are like. Ugh! Thin privileged people omg!

:snooty: :snooty: :snooty:

If they have to make plaques on why they need feminism, then at least form some kind of consensus. This "I need feminism because..." and it's either too thin, too fat, too ugly, too pretty, it's all a bloody mess. It's a feminist issue that you can't find clothes that fit? It's a feminist issue that people have fetishes and some people find being fat attractive? Feminism is standing half-naked in a subway car with 'Beautiful' scribbled all over your fat flabs? There is a distinction to be made about feeling beautiful, and telling others what's beautiful. The attractiveness of fat is subjective, but there is nothing "beautiful" about being unhealthily fat. Especially the kind of fat in that picture, where you can tell all kinds of medical issues either already present or in the future.

There is curvy, but curvy is not fat. There is athletic, but athletic is not anorexic. If you were to tell everyone they were beautiful regardless of their physical size (that is to say, based on ONLY their physical size and not anything else superficially), then you could add the caption 'Beautiful' to these pictures as well.

http://irinamas.files.wordpress.com/201 ... jpeg?w=710

http://blog.lib.umn.edu/reife014/myblog ... ervosa.jpg

http://diseasespictures.com/wp-content/ ... exia-2.jpg

Look, one of them is even a photo model! How can you not say that's beautiful??!

An image that explains the logic of anorexic/bulemic victims:

http://www.felsofokon.hu/sites/default/ ... n-7563.jpg

Here's how I would describe the images (from left to right): curvaceous, slim, GET YOUR ARSE TO A DOCTOR. If less people mollycoddled people whom they saw clearly made some bad decisions in their life then maybe we wouldn't be in this situation in the first place. Oh, and another thing, feminists have this idea that women are forced to look nice to appease the fetishes of men. Then how do you explain runway models? Not that they exist to adhere to MY opinion of what's attractive, but there is nothing about them that attracts me at all. Not one. If there is one thing I know about the human species then it's that they're not supposed to look like stick figures. And how many men, on average, or even in the majority, find the notion of women swept away by a slight gust of wind attractive?

Then there's make-up, fashion, plastic surgery, botox, etc, etc, etc, much I wish had never been invented. I severely doubt these things were decided at the whims of men (or rather, solely at the whims of men). But then I am a white, heterosexual, (not really) able-bodied, (not really) well-off male. I need to check my privilege.

[ConcentratedH2O, OM]

Peezus is busy today proving he is a scientific luddite and almost completely ignorant of modern genetic research.

https://web.archive.org/web/20140514213 ... -junk-dna/

He writes about a paper just published in PLOS Genetics by Palazzo and Gregory, basically a review article on junk DNA.
*snip*

How does that happen? I had this fantasy that science was a meritocracy and that great scientists advanced by having deep knowledge and doing great work, but it seems another way to succeed is leap into a new field and bamboozle everyone with technology.
I am so disillusioned.

*snip*

Good fucking god. Meyers is using creationist arguments!!! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: He has become Ken Ham. The prophecies have been realized, and the great fountains shall shake the pillars of the earth til all mankind shall crumble as unto nought but sand and dust.

[SoylentAtheist]

I can see two from two days ago from some dude called the only real science - both have zero views.

Whomever uploaded that video uploaded a crapton of videos. Could be a spam account, but I bet someone is uploading his personal collection.

[BarnOwl]

Congrats on the PLOS Genetics paper, Strawkins. I was just going to inquire about non-PeeZus non-Moran views of the ENCODE project ... seemed to me that reading the Kellis et al. PNAS paper (here) might be useful, and I got the impression that PZ hadn't done that when he wrote his morning screed (but rather just jumped on the cool kids' bus). I'm more of a mutagenesis/DNA repair-type person, and the Horde commentary on the morning screed is pretty amusing from that angle. Only in the last hour or so has one of them suggested oxidative damage as a predominant cause of DNA lesions that might, if unrepaired, lead to mutations.

[SoylentAtheist]

Re vid. I get an error. More info?

Umm...Lemme try again.

[youtube]WkuB1omkpJw[/youtube]

Here's the raw link.

That was a weird interview. She's weird, dunno how he ever got a job interviewing anyone, jebus.

Non-profit. Cheap/free labor > quality.

[Southern]

The loyal Horde will offer to do anything to alleviate the suffering of PeeZus:

morgan ?! epitheting a metaphor
13 May 2014 at 9:19 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
PZ, I wish I were closer to you. Whenever my friends are sick or somehow discombobulated I descend on them with the home made soup of their choice. I make about 12 different kinds. Sometimes I even include home made bread. I’d love to feed your family with love and good soup.

::pukes::

:roll:

What the fuck? Is PeeZee going under? Is his family starving? Did he lose his job? What?!

[Walter Ego]

Not a particularly fun day today. I woke up with some pain which later grew into almost excruciating pain so I had to take a suppository. Which of course didn't agree with me and was soon expended as quickly as it was inserted, though thankfully not until the pain had subsided. Man. Kidney stone sucks.

So does cancer.

[Walter Ego]

The loyal Horde will offer to do anything to alleviate the suffering of PeeZus:

morgan ?! epitheting a metaphor
13 May 2014 at 9:19 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment
PZ, I wish I were closer to you. Whenever my friends are sick or somehow discombobulated I descend on them with the home made soup of their choice. I make about 12 different kinds. Sometimes I even include home made bread. I’d love to feed your family with love and good soup.

::pukes::

:roll:

What the fuck? Is PeeZee going under? Is his family starving? Did he lose his job? What?!

He's got anal warts.

[Cliché Guevara]

http://nymag.com/thecut/2014/05/harvard ... ation.html

Harvard’s Kennedy School Adds Privilege-Checking to New-Student Orientation

The wonks in training at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government will soon be subjected to a new and touchy-feely line of inquiry: Checking Your Privilege 101. In response to growing demand from student activists, administrators committed Friday to adding a session in power and privilege to its orientation program for incoming first-year students, according to student group HKS Speak Out.

“We’re at one of the most powerful institutions in the world, yet we never critically examine power and privilege and what it means to have access to this power,” says Reetu Mody, a first-year masters student in public policy and a campus activist. “We’re excited to have the administration on board for training all Harvard Kennedy School first years.”

[SoylentAtheist]

http://nymag.com/thecut/2014/05/harvard ... ation.html

Harvard’s Kennedy School Adds Privilege-Checking to New-Student Orientation

The wonks in training at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government will soon be subjected to a new and touchy-feely line of inquiry: Checking Your Privilege 101. In response to growing demand from student activists, administrators committed Friday to adding a session in power and privilege to its orientation program for incoming first-year students, according to student group HKS Speak Out.

“We’re at one of the most powerful institutions in the world, yet we never critically examine power and privilege and what it means to have access to this power,” says Reetu Mody, a first-year masters student in public policy and a campus activist. “We’re excited to have the administration on board for training all Harvard Kennedy School first years.”

If you want to be in politics, you had better know the language of the constituents & some of the special interest groups. Even if you are not seeking to pander to them, it is best to understand them so that you don't stick your foot in your mouth.

[Old_ones]

I'ma bend your ear for a wee moment.

I'm sick of these fucking everyone is beautiful fucking things. And these "redefine" beauty things and feminist fashion and what have you.

Saw this on imgur:

Chick is 'redefining beauty'. And you know what, for a performance art piece, whatever. Or whatever, you wanna be an exhibitionist, IDGAF.

But why is it about being beautiful? Why are they obsessed with being beautiful??? With their fucking hashtags and their drive to be pretty and airbrushing campaigns and other bullshit.

It's so fucking... a million centuries ago, I feel like it's the female fucking dark ages where you have to be pretty or at least redefine pretty until it means you and then tell people they're misogynists if they don't think you're pretty or what the fucking ever fucking ever. And it's not about men, or attracting a mate. It's fucking I don't even fucking know.

Gnar.

It's all part of SJL cult doctrine. They deny reality and insert whatever FEELZ best to them. The victim narrative is sacred and examining privilege is praying. According to the woman who made privilege theory mainstream. Then they strawman anyone who disagrees with them to make it seem like the only people against their denial of reality and attempt to redefine words are EVIL HATERS who just want to ABUSE THE WORLD omg.

I'm not against the fat acceptance movement because I want to beat up fatties and make them kill themselves, I'm against it because they deny reality, promote the notion that fat people should ignore their doctors, tell people that doctors are a bunch of fat-shaming bigots, try to change the meanings of words to better fit their own delusions and (ironically) tell fat people it's okay to be bigoted and rude to thin people because "oh, that thin privilege was unearned, it's not like a thin person used to be fat and worked their ass off to lose the weight."

I have no problem with alcoholics being alcoholic. When they start to promote that lifestyle as healthy and desirable, while spreading hatred against non-alcoholics, then I have a problem.

http://37.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mdbjh ... o1_500.jpg

http://31.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m8ptf ... 1_1280.jpg
^If you like fat women, you're a disgusting fetishist.

If you don't like fat women, you're a disgusting misogynist. You must want to fuck little boys, because that's what thin women are like. Ugh! Thin privileged people omg!

:snooty: :snooty: :snooty:

I don't agree that liking heavy women is a "fetish", but in any case what the hell is wrong with having a fetish? Did I miss the meeting these people apparently had where it was decided that being attracted to people of the same sex is totally cool, but being turned on by latex or high heels is a crime against nature? For being "sex positive", these people sure seem to hate any sexual proclivities that don't fall into one of the neat little boxes they pre-approved.

"Welcome to social justice, are you cis-gay, trans-gay, cis-lesbian, trans-lesbian, otherkin, genderqueer, or A DISGUSTING PERVERT RAPIST WHO NEEDS TO FUCK OFF AND DIE?"

[Mykeru]

For outstanding audio quality, the individual tracks get recorded locally and separately from communication, then uploaded to the technician responsible for mixing and post-production.
Each participant should have a proper mic, know how to set it up and how to create an environment conducive to the purpose.

This way lag never interferes and the audio doesn't get downgraded and compressed to telephone quality.

Then there's the amateur ways.

Can you throw me up some specification how that is done?

What programs for recording locally. Does it just record that one user's audio output?

Make model for "proper mic"? Are we talking headsets here?

We can make you the AV guy. Because everyone wants that job.

[another lurker]

LARPers are not fetishized nearly enough, imo.

[decius]

Did you want beauty?

[youtube]cSr7hh9mbyg[/youtube]

[KiwiInOz]

Not a particularly fun day today. I woke up with some pain which later grew into almost excruciating pain so I had to take a suppository. Which of course didn't agree with me and was soon expended as quickly as it was inserted, though thankfully not until the pain had subsided. Man. Kidney stone sucks.

So does cancer.

So does Walter.

[decius]

Can you throw me up some specification how that is done?

What programs for recording locally. Does it just record that one user's audio output?

Make model for "proper mic"? Are we talking headsets here?

We can make you the AV guy. Because everyone wants that job.

Yes, each user records locally their own track. I need to ask about the best setup without spending a fortune, but I guess pretty much any recording software goes.

Sorry, I would do it, but I'm only into photography and graphics with zero audio direct experience.

[another lurker]

Not a particularly fun day today. I woke up with some pain which later grew into almost excruciating pain so I had to take a suppository. Which of course didn't agree with me and was soon expended as quickly as it was inserted, though thankfully not until the pain had subsided. Man. Kidney stone sucks.

So does cancer.

So does Walter.

You know what sucks? Not having photos of Walter's giant schlong. Concentrated feels unloved, for one thing. :bjarte: