Dear god Steers, directing people to your twitter feed, that's really low,Steersman wrote: Those interested might take a look at my Twitter profile for some elaboration on the theme.
The Refuge of the Toads
-
- Pit Sleuth
- Posts: 1409
- Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 9:54 am
- Location: Blue
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
Really? Although I might point out that I didn't actually provide a link there, and that I've provided other tweets that did so in other contexts. And other people have done similarly so why try to bust my chops?HunnyBunny wrote:Dear god Steers, directing people to your twitter feed, that's really low,Steersman wrote: Those interested might take a look at my Twitter profile for some elaboration on the theme.
But that's the most you can say? Nothing about your completely bogus inference? Someone piss in your conflakes? Still bent out of shape because of my argument about the definition for "woman"? Some of your "friends" sure were.
-
- Pit Sleuth
- Posts: 1409
- Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 9:54 am
- Location: Blue
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
http://24.media.tumblr.com/4e28ad138918 ... o1_250.gifSteersman wrote:Really? Although I might point out that I didn't actually provide a link there, and that I've provided other tweets that did so in other contexts. And other people have done similarly so why try to bust my chops?HunnyBunny wrote:Dear god Steers, directing people to your twitter feed, that's really low,Steersman wrote: Those interested might take a look at my Twitter profile for some elaboration on the theme.
But that's the most you can say? Nothing about your completely bogus inference? Someone piss in your conflakes? Still bent out of shape because of my argument about the definition for "woman"? Some of your "friends" sure were.
:violin:
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
You might note that I did say "it might well still be a set of policies worth considering": Some of them - like no Sharia - might be reasonable and many countries have actually put their foots down there, while banning Islam might be iffy. But you don't know much about Islam, do you? I might suggest you take a look at Matt's comment over on Patheos linking to a post on Islam by Michael Nugent, as well as my subsequent response which elaborates on the theme.Couch wrote:Do you really asscribe to that sort of base bigotry, Steers? Do you think that fake Japanese list would represent a good national policy?Steersman wrote: <snip>
Been thinking of suggesting that a manufacturer of urinals come out with a model with a picture of Muhammad brandishing the Quran in the bowl - sure to be a big seller in some parts of the world, less so in others. And along the same line:
[.tweet][/tweet]
Apparently more of a hope, and propaganda, than a reality, athough it might well still be a set of policies worth considering.
And, just to prove that I'm not (totally) in Fogg's camp of "anti-immigrant right-wingers", you might be interested in this post from a Pakistani-Canadian ex-Muslim woman (Nice Mangos) which is an open letter from her to Sam Harris - and which he has at least acknowledged. But while I sympathize with her concerns, and with many of her quite reasonable arguments, I kind of think this view, by another Pakistani-Canadian, is somewhat more credible, or at least worth a lot of thought:
[.tweet][/tweet]
Do you?
Which front-page? But maybe you'd be happier over at Pharyngula where they see Islam as a race and any criticism of it as racism.Couch wrote:Actually, now I see what's happening on the front-page, Steers, just forget about it.
Fuck me but [you're] a real racist cunt, aren't you.
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
YouTube is starting to piss off its monetized content base with some apparently arbitrary rule changes that wren't communicated. Some reasonabqly big channels have had their income suspended and their videos limited to 15 minutes. They promise one day resolution support but these guys haven't heard from YT in three weeks since they fell afoul of the YT alogrithms:
[youtube]bC3NIdiZF_E[/youtube]
Don't be evil.
[youtube]bC3NIdiZF_E[/youtube]
Don't be evil.
-
- .
- Posts: 625
- Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 10:35 am
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
Was just shared this.
Blocked out MOST people on it. But not all
http://i.imgur.com/AuuRQnZ.jpg
Well, that's not very nice
This was only a few months ago:
http://www.centerforinquiry.net/dc/even ... d-dawkins/
http://i.imgur.com/TT0oHow.png
http://i.imgur.com/Wac6Ven.jpg
Dawkins is in front of the guy in baseball cap on left. Melody is self evident.
Blocked out MOST people on it. But not all
http://i.imgur.com/AuuRQnZ.jpg
Well, that's not very nice
This was only a few months ago:
http://www.centerforinquiry.net/dc/even ... d-dawkins/
http://i.imgur.com/TT0oHow.png
From that same event:To receive discounted admission to this and all upcoming events become a Contributing Member. To get your discount code contact Melody Hensley at mhensley (at) centerforinquiry [dot] net.
http://i.imgur.com/Wac6Ven.jpg
Dawkins is in front of the guy in baseball cap on left. Melody is self evident.
-
- Pit Sleuth
- Posts: 1409
- Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 9:54 am
- Location: Blue
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
And there's Melody claiming that Dawkins video tweet discussion was too upsetting to her and triggerng PTSD. Fuck me, what a huge, hypocritical, nasty cow.HoneyWagon wrote:Was just shared this.
Blocked out MOST people on it. But not all
http://i.imgur.com/AuuRQnZ.jpg
Well, that's not very nice
*snip*
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
He he. That made me laugh hard.
O/T - My work (German multinational industrial behemoth) has launched an internal 'social network' to 'foster the sharing of ideas, innovation and a collegial spirit' because, well, because.
So, you can imbed gifs, and end of last year a colleague got shown some German collegial HR spirit for using that very Justin Bieber gif on said network in an attempt to deescalate an exchange that had gotten testy.
Humourless shits.
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
Front Page is the current page, here, as opposed to four pages back, where I encountered a turd even smellier than you usually deposit, and commented upon it, very much against my better judgment.Steersman wrote:You might note that I did say "it might well still be a set of policies worth considering": Some of them - like no Sharia - might be reasonable and many countries have actually put their foots down there, while banning Islam might be iffy. But you don't know much about Islam, do you? I might suggest you take a look at Matt's comment over on Patheos linking to a post on Islam by Michael Nugent, as well as my subsequent response which elaborates on the theme.Couch wrote: <snip>
Do you really asscribe to that sort of base bigotry, Steers? Do you think that fake Japanese list would represent a good national policy?
Do you?
Which front-page? But maybe you'd be happier over at Pharyngula where they see Islam as a race and any criticism of it as racism.Couch wrote:Actually, now I see what's happening on the front-page, Steers, just forget about it.
Fuck me but [you're] a real racist cunt, aren't you.
"Might"? Is that all you got? Why don't you own your own shit for once, Steers, instead of trying to weasl away under cover of a prolix word-salad? Tell us why the all items on that fake racist-bait Japanese list might be a good idea.
And irrational fear, distrust, othering and hatred of all Muslims isn't racist, you are.
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
To be fair, that's based on external factors, basically how much Canada's economy right now relies on oil prices (Canadian oil is expensive to produce) and how oil prices are being driven down by a dick wagging contest between Putin and Saudi Arabia.Scented Nectar wrote:Some weeks ago, I was surprised to find that buying things in US dollars is a lot more when converted to Canadian dollars. Something I bought for $100 US turned out to be approx $144 Canadian. After Trudeau Junior got in, our dollars were worth shit. And that fucker still hasn't legalized weed. He had promised to do so as soon as he got in last October if elected.DaveDodo007 wrote:Q: When does 77 cents equal a dollarGuest_0048cc29 wrote:[youtube]_GGwfGSHJCY[/youtube]
This video is so good, I recommend playing it at normal speed.
A: Canada.
Fucking lol, don't elect a tumblrena as your leader you stupid gimps.
Never elect a Prime Minister who looks like Wil Wheaton. That should have been an SJW warning sign. Separated at birth.
http://media.hotbirthdays.com/files/197 ... aton-3.jpg
http://www.hilltimes.com/sites/hilltime ... 202563.jpg
-
- .
- Posts: 4969
- Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 4:45 am
- Contact:
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
Even if it doesn't ruin someone's real life, it could ruin their online life. I'm not sure if it would technically count as libel in a court, but ethically it's almost the same thing. Maybe on a slightly lesser scale. Either way though, Com is being absolutely shitty to Steers by making this shit up about him, and it's way out of proportion to the stuff Steers has said about him. The only thing worse than a false claim that someone is a rapist, is a false claim that someone is a rapist of children. It really pisses me off when people do that. If Com had tweeted it in a way that joking around, that would be a different story, but the tweet sounded as though he was stating a fact.HunnyBunny wrote:Serious question regarding all this ''Çomhcinc is libelling Steersman'' hoo-ha - Steersman, as far as I am aware, is a nym behind which there is an anonymous person. His online persona could be nothing at all like the person in real life, all details he has revealed (which are few in my memory) could be a complete fiction.Scented Nectar wrote:It's bad enough that you claimed he's a pedo on twitter in a non-jokey way and sounding serious, but do you really have to continue to do it? Haven't you shit on him enough yet with your libelous crap?comhcinc wrote:I know. See how I turned it around as if to say Steersman would now been contacting you looking for those videos?
Self High Five.
[.img]http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m54fe ... o1_400.gif[/img]
Is it possible to libel an online persona that does not have any connection (AFAIK) with a real person?
I'm sure this is an incredibly philosophical and legal question which greater minds than I could debate for years, but I am curious if there is any precedent for someone successfully suing for the libel in this situation.
PLEASE NOTE FOR NEW PEOPLE: Do not attempt to dox Steersman to prove he is a real person, anyone, ever. On twitter, or anywhere, especially not here. Do not detail anything you may know about Steersman IRL.
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
I'm disappointed, because I want it to come down to Sanders vs. Trump, the two polar opposites. No matter what anyone says, the victor in Iowa was Sanders. He's essentially tied Hillary in a pretty middle of the road state, which means America is ready for a socialist president. This is going to be a very interesting election.Keating wrote:Who's disappointed Trump didn't win Iowa?
Or that Clinton didn't get trounced?
-
- .
- Posts: 625
- Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 10:35 am
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
Re: CUNTY 2015 award winner Connie St. Louis
-
- .
- Posts: 5859
- Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:34 pm
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
HoneyWagon wrote:Was just shared this.
Blocked out MOST people on it. But not all
http://i.imgur.com/AuuRQnZ.jpg
Well, that's not very nice
This was only a few months ago:
http://www.centerforinquiry.net/dc/even ... d-dawkins/
http://i.imgur.com/TT0oHow.pngFrom that same event:To receive discounted admission to this and all upcoming events become a Contributing Member. To get your discount code contact Melody Hensley at mhensley (at) centerforinquiry [dot] net.
http://i.imgur.com/Wac6Ven.jpg
Dawkins is in front of the guy in baseball cap on left. Melody is self evident.
- Attachments
-
- cfiniq.jpg
- (36.86 KiB) Downloaded 249 times
-
- cfinun.jpg
- (37.02 KiB) Downloaded 238 times
-
- .
- Posts: 4969
- Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 4:45 am
- Contact:
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
Me too, but publicly claiming he's a pedo crosses the line.Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:Seeing all the shit Steerzo has given Com when he was in a very difficult situation, to the point where even I thought he was being a bigger douchebag than an enraged Myers, I can understand Com's vindictiveness.Scented Nectar wrote:It's bad enough that you claimed he's a pedo on twitter in a non-jokey way and sounding serious, but do you really have to continue to do it? Haven't you shit on him enough yet with your libelous crap?comhcinc wrote:I know. See how I turned it around as if to say Steersman would now been contacting you looking for those videos?
Self High Five.
[.img]http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m54fe ... o1_400.gif[/img]
-
- .
- Posts: 5859
- Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:34 pm
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
Hunt wrote:I'm disappointed, because I want it to come down to Sanders vs. Trump, the two polar opposites. No matter what anyone says, the victor in Iowa was Sanders. He's essentially tied Hillary in a pretty middle of the road state, which means America is ready for a socialist president. This is going to be a very interesting election.Keating wrote:Who's disappointed Trump didn't win Iowa?
Or that Clinton didn't get trounced?
"which means America is ready for a socialist president."
Alternatively it might mean that Hillary Clinton is a lot less popular than her supporters like to think and Sanders showing was more of a protest vote than anything else.
I get the feeling that the Democrats really wanted Trump to win the republican spot since he is enough of a clown that even an unpopular alternative like Clinton would defeat him.
Cruz is going to look presidential compared to Trump for the rest of the campaign.
This is terrible for Clinton.
-
- .
- Posts: 3014
- Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 3:40 pm
- Location: Dirty Jersey, on the Chemical Coast
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
Regarding carriers comments on the M1 tank.
Looking online I found varying cost per unit 4.3-8.1 mil.( whether this disparity is due to differing variants or actual vs adjusted projected costs is unclear)
The U.S. military has not lost a single tank to enemy action( opposing tank shells)
As far as crew protection goes, that's pretty much the job of all of that armor.( why spend money on 20 or so tons of armor If it isn't keeping something alive?) crew survivability is paramount in any sophisticated weapons system. It's easier to replace a tank than it is to replace the folks driving it.( training takes time and money)
His comments reveal much about his way of thinking.
Once again, as a historian I find his comments incredibly uninformed .
Just my 2 cents
Looking online I found varying cost per unit 4.3-8.1 mil.( whether this disparity is due to differing variants or actual vs adjusted projected costs is unclear)
The U.S. military has not lost a single tank to enemy action( opposing tank shells)
As far as crew protection goes, that's pretty much the job of all of that armor.( why spend money on 20 or so tons of armor If it isn't keeping something alive?) crew survivability is paramount in any sophisticated weapons system. It's easier to replace a tank than it is to replace the folks driving it.( training takes time and money)
His comments reveal much about his way of thinking.
Once again, as a historian I find his comments incredibly uninformed .
Just my 2 cents
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
Do what? I have not claimed on twitter in a non-jokey way and sounding serious that steersman is a pedo since this one tweet.Scented Nectar wrote:It's bad enough that you claimed he's a pedo on twitter in a non-jokey way and sounding serious, but do you really have to continue to do it? Haven't you shit on him enough yet with your libelous crap?comhcinc wrote:I know. See how I turned it around as if to say Steersman would now been contacting you looking for those videos?
Self High Five.
[.img]http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m54fe ... o1_400.gif[/img]
What you quote is where I made a joke about steersman annoying Tigzy about wanting non existent videos of him at 14 with a milkman.
I then congratulated myself for my awesomeness by using an old wrestling gif (of a guy who would give himself a "self high five, boom). This of course was ironic self deprecating humor which is where the joke really is.
You want to continue to harp on a tweet I deleted fine. There might be a spot for you on SGU but don't conflate it with what you are quoting.
I will pretend not to mention that even after you defending the ass, steersman felt the need to argue the point with you. You are literally defending someone who does not want to be defened by you.
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
Cnutella wrote:YouTube is starting to piss off its monetized content base with some apparently arbitrary rule changes that wren't communicated. Some reasonabqly big channels have had their income suspended and their videos limited to 15 minutes. They promise one day resolution support but these guys haven't heard from YT in three weeks since they fell afoul of the YT alogrithms:
Don't be evil.
The problem was fixed within hours of that video being posted. While he has a point he and everyone else needs to understand that youtube is interested in make money for youtube, not for people on youtube. People should keep that in mind. That means that it's not in their interest to go out of their way to help people when issue come up.
The bible reloaded channel just had to deal with a copyright claim. Since they don't rely on youtube to give them ad revenue it did not have a big effect on their wallets.
-
- .
- Posts: 3014
- Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 3:40 pm
- Location: Dirty Jersey, on the Chemical Coast
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
Goddamnit!
Using the I-phone, Writing a comment,i switched to another web page to check on some information, came back to the Pit and my comments were gone....this is bullshit.
Frustrated rant over.
Using the I-phone, Writing a comment,i switched to another web page to check on some information, came back to the Pit and my comments were gone....this is bullshit.
Frustrated rant over.
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
It was pretty much what was expected to happen. I didn't even watch it.Hunt wrote:I'm disappointed, because I want it to come down to Sanders vs. Trump, the two polar opposites. No matter what anyone says, the victor in Iowa was Sanders. He's essentially tied Hillary in a pretty middle of the road state, which means America is ready for a socialist president. This is going to be a very interesting election.Keating wrote:Who's disappointed Trump didn't win Iowa?
Or that Clinton didn't get trounced?
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
Spike13 wrote:Goddamnit!
Using the I-phone, Writing a comment,i switched to another web page to check on some information, came back to the Pit and my comments were gone....this is bullshit.
Frustrated rant over.
Your comment on the tank is there. Are you speaking of something else or did you have to rewrite it.
On my nexus I can write something on the pit. Close the window re open the window and what I wrote will still be there. :D
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
The Sherman was actually a pretty good machine and it gets a bad rap. These factors need to be understood:Brive1987 wrote:And then you had theHelpingHand wrote:That at least is bullshit that is not unique to the good doctor. I have run into the meme that the military does not care about the troops' lives often from the uber progressive crowd. Personally opinion is that it dovetails into their world view that the grunts are poor, underprivileged, practically draftees that the rich white males running the show could not care less about.The Yeti wrote: He also claimed that the Abrams was designed not to protect tank crew members. He was just spewing random bullshit that he had no clue about.
Listing the multitude of crew safety features will not dent the attitude. Keeping the crew alive only lets them finish the mission and return the valuable hardware. If only the rich white males could find a way to kill the crew and still....RonsonSherman.
1) The Shermans had to be a medium size tank so they could be transported. The Allies couldn't field tanks as large as the Germans due to size constraints. This limited the armor thickness and gun size.
2) The Shermans were attacking defended positions with some big guns. The Germans had dug in defenses and were going to have better field position.
3) The Shermans were super reliable compared to their German counterparts which was key to victory. Keep them rolling.
4) The Sherman design was simple and easy to mass produce. We killed the Nazis with better production not better machines.
The Allies had little choice but to use the reliable Sherman. It was a good tank for the job. Two obvious flaws in hindsight. They should have had a wider tread to reduce bogging and they really needed a bigger gun (which is really hard to do in a small tank.... the solution being the Firefly which had to have an open turret to fit the gun... design specifically to be a tank killer).
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
I think the only M1 tanks that were ever killed was from misdirected friendly fire from the air (Warthog I think.)Spike13 wrote:Regarding carriers comments on the M1 tank.
Looking online I found varying cost per unit 4.3-8.1 mil.( whether this disparity is due to differing variants or actual vs adjusted projected costs is unclear)
The U.S. military has not lost a single tank to enemy action( opposing tank shells)
As far as crew protection goes, that's pretty much the job of all of that armor.( why spend money on 20 or so tons of armor If it isn't keeping something alive?) crew survivability is paramount in any sophisticated weapons system. It's easier to replace a tank than it is to replace the folks driving it.( training takes time and money)
His comments reveal much about his way of thinking.
Once again, as a historian I find his comments incredibly uninformed .
Just my 2 cents
-
- .
- Posts: 4969
- Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 4:45 am
- Contact:
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
Ok, then I won't blame Trudeau Junior for that one. Still waiting for legal weed though. :banana-stoner: :obscene-smokingjoint: :obscene-smokingweed: :obscene-smokingred: :obscene-smokingpimp: :obscene-smokingsombrero: :law-policered:Karmakin wrote:To be fair, that's based on external factors, basically how much Canada's economy right now relies on oil prices (Canadian oil is expensive to produce) and how oil prices are being driven down by a dick wagging contest between Putin and Saudi Arabia.Scented Nectar wrote:Some weeks ago, I was surprised to find that buying things in US dollars is a lot more when converted to Canadian dollars. Something I bought for $100 US turned out to be approx $144 Canadian. After Trudeau Junior got in, our dollars were worth shit. And that fucker still hasn't legalized weed. He had promised to do so as soon as he got in last October if elected.DaveDodo007 wrote:Q: When does 77 cents equal a dollar
A: Canada.
Fucking lol, don't elect a tumblrena as your leader you stupid gimps.
Never elect a Prime Minister who looks like Wil Wheaton. That should have been an SJW warning sign. Separated at birth.
http://media.hotbirthdays.com/files/197 ... aton-3.jpg
http://www.hilltimes.com/sites/hilltime ... 202563.jpg
-
- .
- Posts: 3014
- Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 3:40 pm
- Location: Dirty Jersey, on the Chemical Coast
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
Trump did better than I expected.
Cruz did well, although frankly, I don't think he would be the best republican to take the White House.
Clinton did worse than she should have. Warning signs for her campain: all the Dem. and Union functions I've been to for the last six months I haven't seen a single Clinton button or bumper sticker. This is in sharp contrast to eight years ago before the emergence of Obama.
The Pols I've spoken to, ( city councilmen, assemblyman, state senators, a couple of congressmen)
None are showing any great enthusiasm for Clinton, most were non committal.
Sanders did well he's close enough that even a good sound byte can push him past Clinton.
The biggedt loser of the day would have to be Clinton. Given the money, connections and name recognition she should have trounced everyone. She barely pulled out a win. We could be seeing 08' redux.
Cruz did well, although frankly, I don't think he would be the best republican to take the White House.
Clinton did worse than she should have. Warning signs for her campain: all the Dem. and Union functions I've been to for the last six months I haven't seen a single Clinton button or bumper sticker. This is in sharp contrast to eight years ago before the emergence of Obama.
The Pols I've spoken to, ( city councilmen, assemblyman, state senators, a couple of congressmen)
None are showing any great enthusiasm for Clinton, most were non committal.
Sanders did well he's close enough that even a good sound byte can push him past Clinton.
The biggedt loser of the day would have to be Clinton. Given the money, connections and name recognition she should have trounced everyone. She barely pulled out a win. We could be seeing 08' redux.
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
Scary thing is, they might yield that result with current governments- but once UKIP, Front National, Sverigedemokraterna, PVV or DF come to power, a whole lot more will vanish than just immigrants' rights.Scented Nectar wrote:The idea of beating up children sounded horrifying, but then I read that they are referring to "unaccompanied minors". I also read elsewhere that there are many men in their late teens and twenties who claim to be 15 when they immigrate. Perhaps there is less chance of being turned away at borders or something. The islam apologists are against medical tests which can more accurately pinpoint the person's age. They are, or were, fighting to put in laws saying that immigrants can't be age tested.
-
- .
- Posts: 3014
- Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 3:40 pm
- Location: Dirty Jersey, on the Chemical Coast
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
I had to re write it.comhcinc wrote:Spike13 wrote:Goddamnit!
Using the I-phone, Writing a comment,i switched to another web page to check on some information, came back to the Pit and my comments were gone....this is bullshit.
Frustrated rant over.
Your comment on the tank is there. Are you speaking of something else or did you have to rewrite it.
On my nexus I can write something on the pit. Close the window re open the window and what I wrote will still be there. :D
It was a post in the Iowa primaries.
Thanks!
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
re: Melody at CFI - I really think that she should not have applied for any job that she is not mentally (or physically) suited for:
[youtube]Ty68LPKRQQQ[/youtube]
[youtube]Ty68LPKRQQQ[/youtube]
-
- .
- Posts: 4969
- Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 4:45 am
- Contact:
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
When you and me read Steers' posts, we see very different things.comhcinc wrote:Do what? I have not claimed on twitter in a non-jokey way and sounding serious that steersman is a pedo since this one tweet.Scented Nectar wrote:It's bad enough that you claimed he's a pedo on twitter in a non-jokey way and sounding serious, but do you really have to continue to do it? Haven't you shit on him enough yet with your libelous crap?comhcinc wrote:I know. See how I turned it around as if to say Steersman would now been contacting you looking for those videos?
Self High Five.
[.img]http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m54fe ... o1_400.gif[/img]
What you quote is where I made a joke about steersman annoying Tigzy about wanting non existent videos of him at 14 with a milkman.
I then congratulated myself for my awesomeness by using an old wrestling gif (of a guy who would give himself a "self high five, boom). This of course was ironic self deprecating humor which is where the joke really is.
You want to continue to harp on a tweet I deleted fine. There might be a spot for you on SGU but don't conflate it with what you are quoting.
I will pretend not to mention that even after you defending the ass, steersman felt the need to argue the point with you. You are literally defending someone who does not want to be defened by you.
As for "this one tweet" you finally deleted, that wasn't enough for you. You had to continue your slur with a joke that he would want to watch a 14 year old. That's obviously a continuation of your pedo slur. Sure, you've made it jokey at this point, but it's obviously connected to your original non-jokey pedo slur from a few days ago. It just shows that you aren't stopping even if you did delete the original tweet, and that you're doubling or tripling down.
I get that you two hate each other, but maybe stick to the things you are actually pissed off at, like things he's actually said to you rather than shit you've made up about him.
-
- .
- Posts: 3014
- Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 3:40 pm
- Location: Dirty Jersey, on the Chemical Coast
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
John D wrote:The Sherman was actually a pretty good machine and it gets a bad rap. These factors need to be understood:Brive1987 wrote:And then you had theHelpingHand wrote:
That at least is bullshit that is not unique to the good doctor. I have run into the meme that the military does not care about the troops' lives often from the uber progressive crowd. Personally opinion is that it dovetails into their world view that the grunts are poor, underprivileged, practically draftees that the rich white males running the show could not care less about.
Listing the multitude of crew safety features will not dent the attitude. Keeping the crew alive only lets them finish the mission and return the valuable hardware. If only the rich white males could find a way to kill the crew and still....RonsonSherman.
1) The Shermans had to be a medium size tank so they could be transported. The Allies couldn't field tanks as large as the Germans due to size constraints. This limited the armor thickness and gun size.
2) The Shermans were attacking defended positions with some big guns. The Germans had dug in defenses and were going to have better field position.
3) The Shermans were super reliable compared to their German counterparts which was key to victory. Keep them rolling.
4) The Sherman design was simple and easy to mass produce. We killed the Nazis with better production not better machines.
The Allies had little choice but to use the reliable Sherman. It was a good tank for the job. Two obvious flaws in hindsight. They should have had a wider tread to reduce bogging and they really needed a bigger gun (which is really hard to do in a small tank.... the solution being the Firefly which had to have an open turret to fit the gun... design specifically to be a tank killer).
One other point was that the Sherman was built to go up against Panzer 1 and 2's.
It was designed at a time when tanks were smaller lesser armed, the evolution of European tank design rendered it a bit obsolete by the time the U.S. was committed.
It had many innovative features from the single cast armor to the awesome fun stabilization system.( German tanks had to stop to aim effectively , the Sherman's could shoot and scoot well.)
It was a very good design, just out classes by later generations of German armor.
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
John D wrote: The Sherman was actually a pretty good machine and it gets a bad rap. These factors need to be understood:
1) The Shermans had to be a medium size tank so they could be transported. The Allies couldn't field tanks as large as the Germans due to size constraints. This limited the armor thickness and gun size.
2) The Shermans were attacking defended positions with some big guns. The Germans had dug in defenses and were going to have better field position.
3) The Shermans were super reliable compared to their German counterparts which was key to victory. Keep them rolling.
4) The Sherman design was simple and easy to mass produce. We killed the Nazis with better production not better machines.
The Allies had little choice but to use the reliable Sherman. It was a good tank for the job. Two obvious flaws in hindsight. They should have had a wider tread to reduce bogging and they really needed a bigger gun (which is really hard to do in a small tank.... the solution being the Firefly which had to have an open turret to fit the gun... design specifically to be a tank killer).
Good thoughts but a couple of points. There was more than one Sherman. It's design changed over time and was given a bigger guns and better armor. Even then the Sherman was effective again the panzer III and IV when it was first deployed in North Africa in 1942.
Also the reason we stuck with the Sherman had a lot to do with the tank destroyer doctrine of General McNair. He just didn't believe in heavy tanks. The Sherman replacement M26 Pershing would have seen more combat if it wasn't for him.
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
No it that one tweet wasn't enough for me and as I stated I didn't deleted it because I thought better. I did to appease a small group of people here.Scented Nectar wrote: When you and me read Steers' posts, we see very different things.
As for "this one tweet" you finally deleted, that wasn't enough for you. You had to continue your slur with a joke that he would want to watch a 14 year old. That's obviously a continuation of your pedo slur. Sure, you've made it jokey at this point, but it's obviously connected to your original non-jokey pedo slur from a few days ago. It just shows that you aren't stopping even if you did delete the original tweet, and that you're doubling or tripling down.
I get that you two hate each other, but maybe stick to the things you are actually pissed off at, like things he's actually said to you rather than shit you've made up about him.
Now you are stating that there are things I am allowed to joke about. Would you mind showing me that list or it one of those you get to make it up as it goes situations? By the way, I wasn't the person who came up with the joke in the first place.
And yeah I am not going to stop. He doesn't seem to have a problem with it. Why should you? Why are you white knighting steersman?
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
That's weird, because they're explicitly instructed to 'cast down their gaze and lower their voice'.Oglebart wrote:So I'm watching the BBC show The Big Questions, that had the debate with Connie St Louis and Milo last week. The topic this week is " Do we need a British Islam?" There are 3 or 4 people on the more secular side of things, including Adam Deen from the Quilliam Foundation (of which Maajid Nawaz is co-founder). The other participants are more conservative, including an imam and a particularly vociferous woman in a niqab.
-
- .
- Posts: 5470
- Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2014 1:40 pm
- Contact:
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
I've seen a few attempts, but they've all failed. You also can't slander a fictional character.HunnyBunny wrote:Is it possible to libel an online persona that does not have any connection (AFAIK) with a real person?
-
- .
- Posts: 4969
- Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 4:45 am
- Contact:
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
Stop being obtuse. You're pretending like it's totally ok to publicly call someone a pedo without any foundation for the claim. And I'm not against jokes, but your joke was right on the heels of the realistic sounding claim you made in the tweet, which cancels out the joke when seen as a whole. And I think you know that.comhcinc wrote:No it that one tweet wasn't enough for me and as I stated I didn't deleted it because I thought better. I did to appease a small group of people here.Scented Nectar wrote: When you and me read Steers' posts, we see very different things.
As for "this one tweet" you finally deleted, that wasn't enough for you. You had to continue your slur with a joke that he would want to watch a 14 year old. That's obviously a continuation of your pedo slur. Sure, you've made it jokey at this point, but it's obviously connected to your original non-jokey pedo slur from a few days ago. It just shows that you aren't stopping even if you did delete the original tweet, and that you're doubling or tripling down.
I get that you two hate each other, but maybe stick to the things you are actually pissed off at, like things he's actually said to you rather than shit you've made up about him.
Now you are stating that there are things I am allowed to joke about. Would you mind showing me that list or it one of those you get to make it up as it goes situations? By the way, I wasn't the person who came up with the joke in the first place.
And yeah I am not going to stop. He doesn't seem to have a problem with it. Why should you? Why are you white knighting steersman?
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
Do you mean there are people who don't follow their religious tenants? Even as they're advocating their religion?feathers wrote:That's weird, because they're explicitly instructed to 'cast down their gaze and lower their voice'.Oglebart wrote:So I'm watching the BBC show The Big Questions, that had the debate with Connie St Louis and Milo last week. The topic this week is " Do we need a British Islam?" There are 3 or 4 people on the more secular side of things, including Adam Deen from the Quilliam Foundation (of which Maajid Nawaz is co-founder). The other participants are more conservative, including an imam and a particularly vociferous woman in a niqab.
Do such things happen?
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
You need to go back to the last thread and read what I have said. I never claimed to be in the right. I have always stated it was a shitty thing to do.Scented Nectar wrote: Stop being obtuse. You're pretending like it's totally ok to publicly call someone a pedo without any foundation for the claim. And I'm not against jokes, but your joke was right on the heels of the realistic sounding claim you made in the tweet, which cancels out the joke when seen as a whole. And I think you know that.
As for the joke being canceled out? That is complete bullshit. And stupid.
Now why don't you answer my question. Why do you feel the need to whiteknight steersman? He is here he can speak for himself.
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
Why shouldnt she? Do you think only men can be white knights? Shitlord! Dont put a glass ceiling on white knighting! Women can white knight just as well as men can.comhcinc wrote:No it that one tweet wasn't enough for me and as I stated I didn't deleted it because I thought better. I did to appease a small group of people here.Scented Nectar wrote: When you and me read Steers' posts, we see very different things.
As for "this one tweet" you finally deleted, that wasn't enough for you. You had to continue your slur with a joke that he would want to watch a 14 year old. That's obviously a continuation of your pedo slur. Sure, you've made it jokey at this point, but it's obviously connected to your original non-jokey pedo slur from a few days ago. It just shows that you aren't stopping even if you did delete the original tweet, and that you're doubling or tripling down.
I get that you two hate each other, but maybe stick to the things you are actually pissed off at, like things he's actually said to you rather than shit you've made up about him.
Now you are stating that there are things I am allowed to joke about. Would you mind showing me that list or it one of those you get to make it up as it goes situations? By the way, I wasn't the person who came up with the joke in the first place.
And yeah I am not going to stop. He doesn't seem to have a problem with it. Why should you? Why are you white knighting steersman?
http://s.hswstatic.com/gif/rosie-riveter-1.jpg
-
- .
- Posts: 5898
- Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2014 2:05 pm
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
Biting up or biting down? Vampire attacks in New Zealand:
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government ... w-zealand/
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government ... w-zealand/
-
- .
- Posts: 180
- Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2015 7:45 pm
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
Because "political pundit" is basically a synonym for "drooling mongoloid", ignore the MSM and listen to some sage advice from Billy:Keating wrote:Who's disappointed Trump didn't win Iowa?
Or that Clinton didn't get trounced?
Iowan Republicans are complete yokels -- and God-bothering yokels to boot -- so someone like Cruz should win easily there. Trump getting to within a few points of Cruz is a reasonable result for him.
Iowan Democrats are more conservative than East & West coast Dems, so Hillary (the more conservative candidate) should have done better. This is a good result for Bernie -- he can definitely win this.
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
I was hoping to see Trump and Clinton get it on.Keating wrote:Who's disappointed Trump didn't win Iowa?
Or that Clinton didn't get trounced?
Or perhaps Sanders could bang Cruz.
Would make political debates more entertaining.
-
- .
- Posts: 362
- Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2014 5:45 pm
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
I think you're forgetting he was also a competitive cyclist from about 1979. But that's long before he married Rebecca Stollznow and got accused of rape.comhcinc wrote:John D wrote: The Sherman was actually a pretty good machine and it gets a bad rap. These factors need to be understood:
1) The Shermans had to be a medium size tank so they could be transported. The Allies couldn't field tanks as large as the Germans due to size constraints. This limited the armor thickness and gun size.
2) The Shermans were attacking defended positions with some big guns. The Germans had dug in defenses and were going to have better field position.
3) The Shermans were super reliable compared to their German counterparts which was key to victory. Keep them rolling.
4) The Sherman design was simple and easy to mass produce. We killed the Nazis with better production not better machines.
The Allies had little choice but to use the reliable Sherman. It was a good tank for the job. Two obvious flaws in hindsight. They should have had a wider tread to reduce bogging and they really needed a bigger gun (which is really hard to do in a small tank.... the solution being the Firefly which had to have an open turret to fit the gun... design specifically to be a tank killer).
Good thoughts but a couple of points. There was more than one Sherman. It's design changed over time and was given a bigger guns and better armor. Even then the Sherman was effective again the panzer III and IV when it was first deployed in North Africa in 1942.
Also the reason we stuck with the Sherman had a lot to do with the tank destroyer doctrine of General McNair. He just didn't believe in heavy tanks. The Sherman replacement M26 Pershing would have seen more combat if it wasn't for him.
-
- .
- Posts: 820
- Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2016 4:39 pm
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
Yeah, he does do this, I agree.Guestus Aurelius wrote:Carrier does exactly the opposite: first he stakes a position, then he selectively sifts through data he doesn't understand in search of anything he can use or abuse as supporting evidence—typically by quote-mining or misinterpreting it—and then he claims victory. He will never modify his position. His main concern is proving that the position he started with was right.
But what's more important - whether he's actually right, whether he has good ideas, or whether he demonstrates the truth of his ideas well or poorly? He can be a lover of truth (in the sense of wanting to discover the truth, thinking the truth is important) while being poor in the execution of his defence of his ideas (partly, indeed as you say, on account of his arrogance and apriorism), and while failing to put into practice the sound methodology he says is so important (cf. his point about the difference between ancient science and modern science being that ancient science didn't lack any of the tools science usees today, it just had a whole bunch of other, bogus tools that it also used alongside the good ones, and the scientific revolution wasn't about discovering new methods that had never been used before, but rather about dumping the bogus - magical, religious-based- methodologies).
(And partly in response to someone above who asked) I think he's right on quite a few very important things: I think he's right on the objectivity of morality, on the importance, distinct nature and tremendous worthwhileness of philosophy, on the importance of naturalism having a sound, complete philosophical defence; on how philosophy should be understood as all of a piece; on how science should be understood as it used to be, as natural philosophy; on the Aristotelian "circle" of philosophy and the way the parts of philosophy follow on from each other. I think he's right in his Bayesian evangelism (I'm only a recent convert myself, and only just starting to look into the Less Wrong stuff, but Yudkowsky's ideas seem to be based on the same general idea that with Bayesianism we really have discovered a very important and fundamental mode of reasoning that is generalizable in all sorts of ways, and from which many of the familiar modes of reasoning that have always worked fall out logically and naturally).
I also think he's right on the question of Jesus historicity. I used to spend a lot of time on the Biblical Criticism & History sub-forum at FRDB, and developed a strong amateur interest in following the discussions there, and came to a similar mythicist theory to his myself (and mythicism in general had a few able defenders there who were themselves professors). Plus, there really is something a bit rotten in the state of biblical studies, and Carrier is quite right, I think, to point out that the fact that there's no consensus in the field ought to arouse suspicion - and it's not a thought that only he has had, there are a few others who take the same view. I mean, if there were actually a consensus about Jesus' existence and his life, then there might be a reason to pour scorn on the mythicist theory, but if all the consensus there is, is only wrt the sketchiest possible sketch, and biblical scholars can acceptably defend superstructure theories based on that sketchy evidence as diverse as "apocalyptic prophet" and "wisdom sage", then the wagon-circling against mythicism seems premature, suspicious and itself a bit pompous.
Also, let's not forget that the division of science into specialisms isn't essential, it's mostly just a convenience, splitting up the task of knowledge-discovery to make it easier (again, the point re. philosopy - it's all philosophy, with natural philosophy being the part of philosophy that investigates the natural world, and with natural philosophers, scientists, inevitably doing the speculative part of philosophy as a part of their scientific work). Professionalism is great - and the quick and dirty filter of it is valuable, but at the same time, a lot of important stuff has been discovered by independent "gentleman scholars" in the past, and if he were actually a gentlemen himself, his attempt to live free of the institutionalism of academia would be admirable (although of course it does seem to have been forced on him :) ).
And isn't a lot of the interesting work being done today interdisciplinary? Doesn't that need people capable of bridging the specialisms? To mention Carrier and Dennett in the same breath almost makes me feel dirty (I think Dennett really is a modern giant), but I think Carrier has some of the same questing spirit that Dennett has, the same Popperian view of knowledge as knowledge as knowledge (or rather as a set of problems, conjectures, questions, the solutions to which often cross the somewhat arbitrary academic boundaries).
tl;dr I think he's right on quite a few things, and I think it would be possible to defend his ideas better than he defends them himself, with more integrity, less vitriol, arrogance and inflated self-esteem. This isn't a totally unprecedented situation in the history of the pursuit of knowledge (someone has some good ideas, but they're poorly presented and they only get accepted later when better presented and defended - indeed, isn't Bayes himself a minor example of that?)
And so on and so forth. There's a lot to like and admire in what he's written. He's a fair bit more than a stopped clock, but much less than the olympian genius he thinks he is, he's somewhere inbetween - and he also has that unfortunate SJW tic.
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
As another Carrier fan who has been beaten over a period of years into loathing him, I fear you're in for disappointment. Your motte and bailey observation is spot on. He'll sometimes grant a point and apologize, but he'll immediately return to the strong claim after this admission is made. And his apology will almost certainly consist of one line, something like, "You're right! My apologies." This after he has spent several thousand words insisting you're incompetent, lazy, homophobic, racist, sexist, bigoted, probably insane, a rape apologist, a holocaust denier, and so on and so on. If you complain about this, he'll just point you to the fact he apologized and admitted his error and wonder aloud why you're trying to derail the debate.gurugeorge wrote:<snip>Tigzy wrote:[Dicky mode on]
Before I was even an adult, I was out there, delivering much needed supplies under the cover of darkness to desperate people in need. But oh no, I only say this impress the ladies. Yeah. That's the ticket.
[Dicky mode off]
When I was a teenager I had a weekend job as a milkman's helper.
He has changed his mind though, and he has shown intellectual honesty many times, so it's possible he may wake up out of the trance - in which case I'll be very embarrassed by these comments :lol:
I remember him saying he had been big into Ayn Rand back in the day and became enraged after being defeated in debate by someone who really knew their stuff. He knew he needed to work on epistemology, get down to foundations so he couldn't be mislead again. Well, I've been in similar situations when I was a student, and my takeaway was to stop assuming stupidity or bad faith every time someone disagreed with me. Carrier has never had that epiphany, and never will.
-
- .
- Posts: 3014
- Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 3:40 pm
- Location: Dirty Jersey, on the Chemical Coast
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
Sunder wrote:
Now that's funny!
-
- .
- Posts: 820
- Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2016 4:39 pm
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
Nah, not going to happen, Sanders' vote is skewed towards the very young and very old, which isn't going to be enough.Dick Strawkins wrote: "which means America is ready for a socialist president."
The Left is demoralized at the moment. It has to be quite difficult to come to terms with the fact that a) golden boy Obama's screwed up badly at home, and b) he's raised the world temperature quite unnecessarily due to some major mistakes (or were they? ¬_¬ ) in foreign policy (e.g. Libya/Syria/Iraq fuckups leading to the migrant crisis, the poor Iran deal, plus just generally being a bit of a laughing stock,e.g. re. Putin's manly shenanigans). Also, the choice between Hilary and Bernie is hardly inspiring (except for the very young/old demographics as aforementioned).
No, unless the Republicans stupidly nominate Trump, which would totally galvanize the Left and render the Left-wing candidate irrelevant in a tsunami of "not-Trump", I'm approaching certainty that the next president is going to be either Cruz or Rubio (and good thing too, on the whole, despite all the God-talk making my arse twitch). Trump's "unstoppable clown car" (Scott Adams) has been fun, and he's to be congratulated for shifting the Overton window, but he's such a buffoon that the Left would just be unable to let him pass, whereas a demoralized Left could easily just think "fuck it" and let the young, charismatic Cruz/Rubio have a go for a change.
-
- .
- Posts: 5429
- Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 10:32 am
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
Rights for fictional characters! #fictivelivesmatterBillie from Ockham wrote:I've seen a few attempts, but they've all failed. You also can't slander a fictional character.HunnyBunny wrote:Is it possible to libel an online persona that does not have any connection (AFAIK) with a real person?
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
:D
Carrier is only interested in HIS truth. Just look how long it took him to admit 20% of the truth about the peer review nature of his book and the nature of his publisher. He's still bullshitting everyone on that and look at the lengths Brive had to go to in order to get him to concede to so little.jet_lagg wrote:As another Carrier fan who has been beaten over a period of years into loathing him, I fear you're in for disappointment. Your motte and bailey observation is spot on. He'll sometimes grant a point and apologize, but he'll immediately return to the strong claim after this admission is made. And his apology will almost certainly consist of one line, something like, "You're right! My apologies." This after he has spent several thousand words insisting you're incompetent, lazy, homophobic, racist, sexist, bigoted, probably insane, a rape apologist, a holocaust denier, and so on and so on. If you complain about this, he'll just point you to the fact he apologized and admitted his error and wonder aloud why you're trying to derail the debate.gurugeorge wrote:<snip>Tigzy wrote:[Dicky mode on]
Before I was even an adult, I was out there, delivering much needed supplies under the cover of darkness to desperate people in need. But oh no, I only say this impress the ladies. Yeah. That's the ticket.
[Dicky mode off]
When I was a teenager I had a weekend job as a milkman's helper.
He has changed his mind though, and he has shown intellectual honesty many times, so it's possible he may wake up out of the trance - in which case I'll be very embarrassed by these comments :lol:
I remember him saying he had been big into Ayn Rand back in the day and became enraged after being defeated in debate by someone who really knew their stuff. He knew he needed to work on epistemology, get down to foundations so he couldn't be mislead again. Well, I've been in similar situations when I was a student, and my takeaway was to stop assuming stupidity or bad faith every time someone disagreed with me. Carrier has never had that epiphany, and never will.
-
- .
- Posts: 820
- Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2016 4:39 pm
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
Ah! Good to know, I had a strong suspicion that there was a hint of something like Randroidism in him. Yeah it's the same syndrome, exactly as you say.jet_lagg wrote:I remember him saying he had been big into Ayn Rand back in the day and became enraged after being defeated in debate by someone who really knew their stuff. He knew he needed to work on epistemology, get down to foundations so he couldn't be mislead again. Well, I've been in similar situations when I was a student, and my takeaway was to stop assuming stupidity or bad faith every time someone disagreed with me. Carrier has never had that epiphany, and never will.
I don't like the Objectivist movement that much (although they do have a "moderate", non-zombie wing that you can have reasonable conversations with) but I do actually quite like Rand herself (she was certainly spot on in terms of her observations about the decay of academia into SJW shit - perhaps because she'd lived through the first iteration of it herself in Soviet Russia, and seen pop eat itself there). While she does make some big mistakes here and there, she's a lot more coherent than most people give her credit for. The interviews with her on Youtube are pretty awesome, even if you disagree with her you've got to admit she was a considerable lady. She really was solidly a Russianthinker in some ways, not American at all, even though she loved the US.
But that certainly makes it all clearer re. Carrier, thanks for that tidbit.
-
- .
- Posts: 5429
- Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 10:32 am
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
You were in bed with a drunk woman and you didn't rape her? BANNED FROM THE PIT!Service Dog wrote:Wednesday, I heard from the girl I've gone on a couple dates with: she texted "2 more days" until she was quitting her job. I told her she sounded like a retiring cop who wasn't going to live to the end of a movie, but said I'd avenge her. Saturday I took her out to celebrate.
We started at Fang's bar, where I'm always treated like a returning hero. The bartenders poured too strong & my date was too drunk too quick. I hailed a cab, but a few blocks later she said 'stop, let's walk' rather than risk puking in the backseat.
On foot, she immediately twisted an ankle & a lost a contact lens under her eyelid. I took her into a fluorescent porno video store-- to see if I could fish out the contact. No luck. So now she was a squinty-eyed limping drunk, eighty long blocks away from home. The retiring-cop movie-scenario was accurate.
We hobbled to a train, I held her vertical on the platform & hugged her to counteract motion nausea on the train. Aboveground I carried her the last few blocks. I got past her building's lobby for the first time & she told me to push the elevator button "PH". I was pleased to see her place was a complete mess. She fumbled with saline solution & I tied a packet of frozen corn to her ankle.
We collapsed on the bed. The next morning was hangover-y. She ordered bagels & coffee from the deli, but I took mine to-go. Amazon delivered the piss-strips I had ordered, so the adventure's bagel & booze were officially the last carbs I'd eat for a while. Sunday was hangover recovery. And Monday was the transitional day of 'keto flu'. But I just pissed on the medical test strip & compared it to the color chart on the pill container. My ketones are between 1.5 and 4.... good progress for a dieter. (Might be bad news for a diabetic, tho.)
The purpose of all this is to say I passed yesterday-- and most of last night-- watching "Regular Car Reviews" on Youtube. It's 5 am now.
Regular Car reviews is -- a couple guys. One usually writes nutty songs about old cars & the other talks-like Mykeru. They are the unsung poet laureates of America.[youtube] -X4pvsoZ35k[/youtube]
Seriously though, are you going full Atkins'?
-
- .
- Posts: 3014
- Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 3:40 pm
- Location: Dirty Jersey, on the Chemical Coast
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
Another neat thing about the Sherman was it's use of an 400 hp air cooled radial engine.( this was later replaced with a 36 cylinder 470 hp diesel) light weight, reliable. Quick to peak power.
Granted a gasoline engine in a tank was controversial to say the least, but given the situation and thinking during its design, one could see the appeal of it.
Granted a gasoline engine in a tank was controversial to say the least, but given the situation and thinking during its design, one could see the appeal of it.
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
Ahermit's being a dumbass over at Mick's.
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
How?gurugeorge wrote: The Left is demoralized at the moment. It has to be quite difficult to come to terms with the fact that a) golden boy Obama's screwed up badly at home
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
With the really good performance by Bernie, Hilary has a tough slog ahead. He could pull it away from her since her negatives are pretty high. She is also not very inspiring and is just running with "I have the best resume'".gurugeorge wrote:Nah, not going to happen, Sanders' vote is skewed towards the very young and very old, which isn't going to be enough.Dick Strawkins wrote: "which means America is ready for a socialist president."
The Left is demoralized at the moment. It has to be quite difficult to come to terms with the fact that a) golden boy Obama's screwed up badly at home, and b) he's raised the world temperature quite unnecessarily due to some major mistakes (or were they? ¬_¬ ) in foreign policy (e.g. Libya/Syria/Iraq fuckups leading to the migrant crisis, the poor Iran deal, plus just generally being a bit of a laughing stock,e.g. re. Putin's manly shenanigans). Also, the choice between Hilary and Bernie is hardly inspiring (except for the very young/old demographics as aforementioned).
No, unless the Republicans stupidly nominate Trump, which would totally galvanize the Left and render the Left-wing candidate irrelevant in a tsunami of "not-Trump", I'm approaching certainty that the next president is going to be either Cruz or Rubio (and good thing too, on the whole, despite all the God-talk making my arse twitch). Trump's "unstoppable clown car" (Scott Adams) has been fun, and he's to be congratulated for shifting the Overton window, but he's such a buffoon that the Left would just be unable to let him pass, whereas a demoralized Left could easily just think "fuck it" and let the young, charismatic Cruz/Rubio have a go for a change.
Rubio was a big winner with a strong third place. He will stay in for the long haul as other "mainstream' Reps drop out.
Don't count Trump out. He is a master troll and will continue to have wins for the long run. His nearly beating Cruz in Iowa is big news. Cruz should have crushed Iowa.
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
The length is verging on Carrierosity here: hmmm....gurugeorge wrote:Yeah, he does do this, I agree.Guestus Aurelius wrote:Carrier does exactly the opposite: first he stakes a position, then he selectively sifts through data he doesn't understand in search of anything he can use or abuse as supporting evidence—typically by quote-mining or misinterpreting it—and then he claims victory. He will never modify his position. His main concern is proving that the position he started with was right.
But what's more important - whether he's actually right, whether he has good ideas, or whether he demonstrates the truth of his ideas well or poorly? He can be a lover of truth (in the sense of wanting to discover the truth, thinking the truth is important) while being poor in the execution of his defence of his ideas (partly, indeed as you say, on account of his arrogance and apriorism), and while failing to put into practice the sound methodology he says is so important (cf. his point about the difference between ancient science and modern science being that ancient science didn't lack any of the tools science usees today, it just had a whole bunch of other, bogus tools that it also used alongside the good ones, and the scientific revolution wasn't about discovering new methods that had never been used before, but rather about dumping the bogus - magical, religious-based- methodologies).
(And partly in response to someone above who asked) I think he's right on quite a few very important things: I think he's right on the objectivity of morality, on the importance, distinct nature and tremendous worthwhileness of philosophy, on the importance of naturalism having a sound, complete philosophical defence; on how philosophy should be understood as all of a piece; on how science should be understood as it used to be, as natural philosophy; on the Aristotelian "circle" of philosophy and the way the parts of philosophy follow on from each other. I think he's right in his Bayesian evangelism (I'm only a recent convert myself, and only just starting to look into the Less Wrong stuff, but Yudkowsky's ideas seem to be based on the same general idea that with Bayesianism we really have discovered a very important and fundamental mode of reasoning that is generalizable in all sorts of ways, and from which many of the familiar modes of reasoning that have always worked fall out logically and naturally).
I also think he's right on the question of Jesus historicity. I used to spend a lot of time on the Biblical Criticism & History sub-forum at FRDB, and developed a strong amateur interest in following the discussions there, and came to a similar mythicist theory to his myself (and mythicism in general had a few able defenders there who were themselves professors). Plus, there really is something a bit rotten in the state of biblical studies, and Carrier is quite right, I think, to point out that the fact that there's no consensus in the field ought to arouse suspicion - and it's not a thought that only he has had, there are a few others who take the same view. I mean, if there were actually a consensus about Jesus' existence and his life, then there might be a reason to pour scorn on the mythicist theory, but if all the consensus there is, is only wrt the sketchiest possible sketch, and biblical scholars can acceptably defend superstructure theories based on that sketchy evidence as diverse as "apocalyptic prophet" and "wisdom sage", then the wagon-circling against mythicism seems premature, suspicious and itself a bit pompous.
Also, let's not forget that the division of science into specialisms isn't essential, it's mostly just a convenience, splitting up the task of knowledge-discovery to make it easier (again, the point re. philosopy - it's all philosophy, with natural philosophy being the part of philosophy that investigates the natural world, and with natural philosophers, scientists, inevitably doing the speculative part of philosophy as a part of their scientific work). Professionalism is great - and the quick and dirty filter of it is valuable, but at the same time, a lot of important stuff has been discovered by independent "gentleman scholars" in the past, and if he were actually a gentlemen himself, his attempt to live free of the institutionalism of academia would be admirable (although of course it does seem to have been forced on him :) ).
And isn't a lot of the interesting work being done today interdisciplinary? Doesn't that need people capable of bridging the specialisms? To mention Carrier and Dennett in the same breath almost makes me feel dirty (I think Dennett really is a modern giant), but I think Carrier has some of the same questing spirit that Dennett has, the same Popperian view of knowledge as knowledge as knowledge (or rather as a set of problems, conjectures, questions, the solutions to which often cross the somewhat arbitrary academic boundaries).
tl;dr I think he's right on quite a few things, and I think it would be possible to defend his ideas better than he defends them himself, with more integrity, less vitriol, arrogance and inflated self-esteem. This isn't a totally unprecedented situation in the history of the pursuit of knowledge (someone has some good ideas, but they're poorly presented and they only get accepted later when better presented and defended - indeed, isn't Bayes himself a minor example of that?)
And so on and so forth. There's a lot to like and admire in what he's written. He's a fair bit more than a stopped clock, but much less than the olympian genius he thinks he is, he's somewhere inbetween - and he also has that unfortunate SJW tic.
-
- .
- Posts: 5429
- Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 10:32 am
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
When I was a tyke the TV commercials for Suspiria scared the piss out of me. When I finally saw it as a teen, I could appreciate its campy goodness.feathers wrote:You mean, you're watching all of his films over the week? Poor chap. Have some beer ready.Shatterface wrote:I've been having a Dario Argento season this week and I now realise why the Blockbot admins look so familiar.
It's like they've all chosen to dress like a 1970s giallo serial killer.
-
- .
- Posts: 820
- Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2016 4:39 pm
Re: The Refuge of the Toads
It's the economy, stupid :) Plus he's a divider not a uniter, has offered the opposite of hope and change, and his flagship legacy thingie, Obamacare, is a bit of a mess for a considerable minority of people.comhcinc wrote:How?gurugeorge wrote: The Left is demoralized at the moment. It has to be quite difficult to come to terms with the fact that a) golden boy Obama's screwed up badly at home
His speechifying is also now boring - he's lost a good deal of his charisma and his stock of cliches is tired and worn-out. And in large scale democracy, where rational ignorance rules, charisma is about 70-80% (in terms of rectally-extracted statistics) of what people actually vote on.