Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

[James Caruthers]

Becky made a good video? Well, that's one. Let's see how long (how many Patreon dollars and trips to the liquor store) it takes her to get to two.

[Lsuoma]

True, it was a nice enough take down of Ellen and that disgusting psychic (a tautology).

But if you listen to the last minute, it turns out to be a plea by Becky to get herself an invite onto Ellen's show.

I'm a skeptic, let her change my mind. Or better yet,let her change the mind of James Randi...She'll even have a head start, considering that we both have Wikipedia pages."

So now Becky is placing herself alongside Randi in the pantheon of great skeptics? Oh,my.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

You don’t think you’re being a mite, shall we say, hyperskeptical? Both you and Aneris, at least, concede that it was a decent enough video so it seems a mite picky to be quibbling about an en passant linking with Randi. And she did give him top billing with her “or better yet”, and the reference to Wikipedia pages seems, charitably speaking, to be no more than suggesting a heads-up to Ellen should she wish to know who she was confronting.

Although I would probably pay to see a debate between DeGeneres and Watson wherein the latter touts the “feminist” line that gender, if not sex itself, is only a social construct – which should quite readily encompass homosexuality.

In any case, while I’ll readily throw a stone or two at Watson for various shenanigans, it seems reasonable to concede that she does make at least a few positive contributions to atheism & skepticism.

I swear, I >>>***SWEAR***<<< Steerzo IS Mr. Logic. Reallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreally
reallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreally
reallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreally
reallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreally
reallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreally
reallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreally!!!!

[AndrewV69]

@Robokitty ... what exactly am I to make of this?

[youtube]WANZBs8Za0Q[/youtube]

[Skep tickle]

@Robokitty ... what exactly am I to make of this?

[.youtube]WANZBs8Za0Q[/youtube]

That was pretty interesting, not least for the score, which at first just seemed to be some music that happened to work well, but as the video progressed seemed like it had to have been written for that scene. Credits at end say the music was by Alan Silvestri - this one? - though I don't see this youtube video listed in his Discography there...

[Spike13]

Thanks for the welcome Aneris

Tigzy, Guestus, and the rest of you thanks for the support and the help.

[Guestus Aurelius]

I'm skeptical, Skep tickle—I thought you didn't care for music. :violin:

[Lsuoma]

@Robokitty ... what exactly am I to make of this?

[youtube]WANZBs8Za0Q[/youtube]

Message is forget cats, corvids smarter. I have seen corvids push MUCH bigger scavengers off food by being annoying many times. Last time, I saw two crows push a Bald Eagle off a seal carcass at Kalaloch, WA, just by annoying and teasing the fuck out of it. The eagle tried to pick up the carcass and fly off with it, but it was way too heavy.

Fascinating to watch. Corvids will overtake hoomins soon, I hope, and kittys will be assigned to the toilet they deserve.

[Liesmith]

@Robokitty ... what exactly am I to make of this?

[youtube]WANZBs8Za0Q[/youtube]

Those crows are clearly CGI, and that one cat is a heretic, which is why it was being punished.

[Dick Strawkins]

@Robokitty ... what exactly am I to make of this?

[.youtube]WANZBs8Za0Q[/youtube]

That was pretty interesting, not least for the score, which at first just seemed to be some music that happened to work well, but as the video progressed seemed like it had to have been written for that scene. Credits at end say the music was by Alan Silvestri - this one? - though I don't see this youtube video listed in his Discography there...

I think it was clever editing of part of the soundtrack of 'Predator'. In other words someone took that soundtrack and cut parts of it out and joined them together again to fit the scene to create the illusion that it was written especially for the crow/cat-fight.
So the music was originally written by Alan Silvestri - but it was sampled and rehashed to make the piece we hear on this video.

[JacquesCuze]

@Robokitty ... what exactly am I to make of this?

[.youtube]WANZBs8Za0Q[/youtube]

That was pretty interesting, not least for the score, which at first just seemed to be some music that happened to work well, but as the video progressed seemed like it had to have been written for that scene. Credits at end say the music was by Alan Silvestri - this one? - though I don't see this youtube video listed in his Discography there...

So I recall seeing this video not only posted at FARK, but your question was asked there as well.
Um, I don't recommend visiting FARK, if you have an addictive personality and a weakness for snark and puns based on the current news, it can ruin your life.

Thread for this video:
http://www.fark.com/comments/6269208/Ep ... d-by-birds

This video explains how the music was created:
[youtube]cIkc3eGPeRk[/youtube]

RoyBatty: Since I am a nitwit, it creates more questions than it answers. I see him slicing and dicing the music and shifting it around. How come I don't hear that? Would people who know music cringe when listening to that?

icebalm: No, the reason (lol) you don't hear that is because he's using tracker software and loop samples. Each instrument is on it's own track and the software mixes/flattens (renders) it all together in the end to make the final.

[youtube]_MqHN-4okZ4[/youtube]

His channel has lots of this stuff:
https://www.youtube.com/user/ignoramusky

[Dick Strawkins]

<snip>

Speaking of which, Peez's latest post involves him kissing Watson's no doubt foul, porridgey ass yet again, exclaiming 'Now that's good skepticism!' with regard to a video the Glob has made, where she lectures Ellen Degeneres about not getting involved with some psychic, or something. I hardly think that assuming someone properly famous is gonna look at your cobbled together Youtube vid and gush 'Oh Gosh Becky, how come I've never heard of you???!!' is an example of good skepticism, but this is PZ land we're talking about here, where all women need to be protected by him from the likes of those Shermer types who keep persuading these women into getting raped by them.

Peez is such a contemptible beta orbiter. Frankly, Peez, if you're gonna be such creep, at least have the decency to be creepy about a comparatively decent tart, like the one which serves in my local fish and chip shop. She has tattooed knuckles and one of those eyes which always looks the other way, so I can never be sure if she's asking me or someone else if I want vinegar with that.

I liked Rebecca Watson's video. In fact, I think it is her best since the other good one she made about douches some years ago (which was a lecture). There was nothing new in it, yes, and all she says was pointed out before, yes, but that doesn't affect the quality. It's just not that interesting if it's all known to you, but her target is this show and she might make a difference. And indeed, PZ Myers is correct, that's a good one.

It may be churlish to complain about this particular video but I do wonder whether we should be careful not to overly praise it.
Pointing out the psychics are frauds is skepticism 101. It is good that Watson would do that but let's not fool ourselves that she is doing anything different than thousands of other sleptic writers - most of whom (such as Sharon Hill, Barbara Drescher, Hayley Stevens, Ben Goldacre etc) do a far better job of it.
What is the reason why Rebecca should earn special praise on this occasion but those others don't?

Is her video particularly better than the types of reports made by other skeptics?

Or... do we have such low expectations from her that anything that is not laughably inept or manipulative is seen as relatively brilliant?

So, I am not going to praise or complain about her video.
What I can do, however, is point out that Rebecca has had the spotlight on her for nearly three years as the most prominent skeptic woman on the internet (and, frankly, that by itself is horrifying.)

Shouldn't she have been making these kinds of videos right from the beginning?

Or, if we are prepared to believe that she was scared from youtube by the comments she was getting (if only there was some way of stopping that, like, I don't know, switching off the comments perhaps?) publicising this aspect of skepticism on her blog rather than her war on MRAdudes or whatever they call them these days.

[Skep tickle]

I liked Rebecca Watson's video. In fact, I think it is her best since the other good one she made about douches some years ago (which was a lecture). There was nothing new in it, yes, and all she says was pointed out before, yes, but that doesn't affect the quality. It's just not that interesting if it's all known to you, but her target is this show and she might make a difference. And indeed, PZ Myers is correct, that's a good one.

I liked it better than the others of hers that I've watched.

Small points, I found her nearly constant gesturing to be repetitive & distracting, and IMO the jokey part about the Nobel prizes didn't work well (esp since there were few other jokes in this piece).

Highlights were the topic, sure maybe she's angling to get on the Ellen Degeneres Show, but if Ellen Degeneres is promoting a 'psychic' then having a skeptic on the show - including Watson - could provide a very useful opportunity to debunk, on a very big platform. Also it looked good - good quality - few distractions (other than those gestures), solid colors including a solid black background, little distraction, no wine bottles or cats.

The line about charlatans trying to take people's money was worth a grin, too. :)

[Spike13]

What is the reason why Rebecca should earn special praise on this occasion but those others don't?

Because Becky was sober.
:rimshot:

[James Caruthers]

But was she sober, Spike? How can you tell? When have we ever had a baseline sober Becky to compare to? :?

[youtube]aCVA54UFXGc[/youtube]

[Skep tickle]

I'm skeptical, Skep tickle—I thought you didn't care for music. :violin:

Damn you caught me ;)

No, actually, my husband plays cello (hobby, not his line of work) & takes every opportunity he can get to play in orchestras pulled together to record movie scores (small independent movies, probably mostly ones done by students in courses at local universities). And then he comments to me on the scores to movies we're watching. So I hear a fair amount about movie scores, not that I can truthfully say I've learned that much.

Thanks Dick Strawkins & JacquesCuze for the additional info on where the music came from & how it was edited for this particular video.

I hope the white & brown cat ended up getting away. :cry:

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

*snip*...and there are no fairy-alike things anywhere...*/snip*

I kinda ressent that statement!

But yep, I have to agree with your comment in whole (Italy, Spain and Poland notwithstanding).

[Steersman]

<snip>
Although I would probably pay to see a debate between DeGeneres and Watson wherein the latter touts the “feminist” line that gender, if not sex itself, is only a social construct – which should quite readily encompass homosexuality.

In any case, while I’ll readily throw a stone or two at Watson for various shenanigans, it seems reasonable to concede that she does make at least a few positive contributions to atheism & skepticism.

I swear, I >>>***SWEAR***<<< Steerzo IS Mr. Logic. Reallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreally
reallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreally
reallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreally
reallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreally
reallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreally
reallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreally!!!!

Well then Lymphoma, since you were really, really^97, really sure, it seemed worth taking a look. And, yes, you’re right: there does seem to be some justification for that judgement – I’ll try to keep that in mind for future reference.

[Skep tickle]

It may be churlish to complain about this particular video but I do wonder whether we should be careful not to overly praise it.
Pointing out the psychics are frauds is skepticism 101. It is good that Watson would do that but let's not fool ourselves that she is doing anything different than thousands of other sleptic writers - most of whom (such as Sharon Hill, Barbara Drescher, Hayley Stevens, Ben Goldacre etc) do a far better job of it.
What is the reason why Rebecca should earn special praise on this occasion but those others don't?

Is her video particularly better than the types of reports made by other skeptics?

Or... do we have such low expectations from her that anything that is not laughably inept or manipulative is seen as relatively brilliant?

So, I am not going to praise or complain about her video.
What I can do, however, is point out that Rebecca has had the spotlight on her for nearly three years as the most prominent skeptic woman on the internet (and, frankly, that by itself is horrifying.)

Shouldn't she have been making these kinds of videos right from the beginning?

Or, if we are prepared to believe that she was scared from youtube by the comments she was getting (if only there was some way of stopping that, like, I don't know, switching off the comments perhaps?) publicising this aspect of skepticism on her blog rather than her war on MRAdudes or whatever they call them these days.

She's matured, at least in the sense of recognizing the importance of the presentation, both of herself and in the quality of production. She's still trying to find her niche, at least in the sense of trying to find something that pays (in money and/or fame, either one okay though both preferred). She has tried before to branch out from preaching to the choir (telling skeptics about skepticism stuff), witness her presence on that panel discussion on Reddit at SXSW a year ago.

Maybe an appearance on the Ellen Degeneres Show could be the opening she needs to make it in the big time. Maybe not just one appearance - maybe recurring appearances, like Randi did on the Johnny Carson show. Hey, it could be a win-win - for atheism/skepticism and for Ms Watson. (Could be, I said.)

[Søren Lilholt]

Stollznow has now reached over $44000 which is way over her $30000 goal. But where were the social justice warriors in these other Indiegogo campaigns for harassment in the workplace? These campaigns didn't receive a single cent!





Why is Stollznow so damn more important than these other victims of sexual harassment? Is it because they weren't outspoken skeptics and atheists?

In their defense, it did not even hit their radar. It would be a far more interesting scenario if a similar active campaign fund raiser were brought to their attention.

I think this woman has benefitted from what you might call the Saddam Effect. Just as, IIRC, whenever Saddam Hussein gave a speech, everyone had to whoop and cheer or else they would be singled out, so here, everyone in the twat circlejerk MUST be seen to be donating otherwise they are not a True Stollznow Supporter and Don't Truly Care. For anyone who doesn't pony up their $100, questions will be asked. Fingers will be pointed. Whispering campaigns will start.

If donations had remained anonymous, she would have been lucky to get $40, much less $40k. Canny move, Karen, canny move.

[Dick Strawkins]

Maybe an appearance on the Ellen Degeneres Show could be the opening she needs to make it in the big time. Maybe not just one appearance - maybe recurring appearances, like Randi did on the Johnny Carson show. Hey, it could be a win-win - for atheism/skepticism and for Ms Watson. (Could be, I said.)

I've followed Rebecca Watson's progress over the years and nothing suggests she has what it takes, at least knowledge-wise, to make it in the skeptical big time.
She has jumped back and forth between bigfoot/ghosthunting skepticism and feminist SJW-dom and doesn't fit in either category.
The idea that she would be seen as a TV figurehead replacement for Randi is about as likely as her replacing Christopher Hitchens as the atheist columnist for Slate.
Of course Slate did give her a chance in that role and she lasted two columns - one complaining about atheist men, and the other discussing the contents of a silly airline magazine that sold products for pets - after which she was promptly canned.

If she was to make it to the big time she would have to be either knowledgeable about her subject (which she is not) or she would need to have other talents that TV shows seek out. She is not pretty looking (sorry Rebecca!) and she is certainly nowhere near as funny as she thinks she is. She has a draw in the US skeptical community due to the SGU factor but that means nothing in mainstream TV. Does anyone seriously think a TV show would choose to have her on rather than a skeptic with greater public clout like Shermer for example (if we're going to forget about Randi) or, in terms of well known female skeptic/science promoters Cara Santa Maria (who is not only very photogenic and has a pleasant personality, but also is a published scientist and actually reads up in depth on the subjects she covers.
http://ediciongeek.com/wp-content/uploa ... /04/52.jpg

Frankly, the idea of Watson representing the skeptic community to the world is about as appealing as oolon representing the atheist community.

[jimthepleb]

And here's a lovely, compassionate response from the comments, which shows just how inclusive Meyers's people are:

http://i.imgur.com/Oz3DrfX.png

[youtube]i9fFfYKvDgk[/youtube]

[Hunt]

I think you hit the nail on the head with pleasantness of personality. I mean, consider Bill Nye, Shermer or even Dawkins as public personalities. Dawkins has this reputation of being "strident," but when you actually consider his public persona, he a pretty damn polite and personable guy. I remember the first time I saw him on Youtube I thought to myself: "this guy is Harry Potter in his late sixties." Bill Nye, well, we know what he's like. He can talk to creationists without raising a heat, and even Shermer can discuss things like transhumanism without calling his interlocutor a "fuckwit."

Watson, Myers, the rest, are interpersonal passive aggressive sadists. Bottom line, that is their major problem. They enjoy baiting and taunting their enemies, and they have many enemies and they enjoy having enemies.

[jimthepleb]

@Robokitty ... what exactly am I to make of this?

[youtube]WANZBs8Za0Q[/youtube]

Ah that's where Sacha has been, winding up the pussies in the park.

[Mykeru]

Via Reddit:

http://i.imgur.com/oN2TV84.png

Professor of Social Justice Historical Blah-Blah-Blah in the making.

[James Caruthers]

An oldie but a goodie...

You’re saying members of the ‘pit are okay with threats of rape and/or death?

Martin Wagner: The ones who actually make such threats do seem to be. There may be some members of the ‘pit who object to such behavior. Why they are members of the ‘pit at all is a mystery best known to them, I suspect.

http://view.mangamonger.com/gallery/Ich ... 04_123.JPG
http://view.mangamonger.com/gallery/Ich ... 04_124.JPG
^Typical slymepitter.

[Brive1987]

To be blunt, what the hell does it matter if Becky makes a passing video about cold readings?

From my perspective there is one clear message: fascism was evil Watson is a dangerous bitch who has, does and will have a serious impact on how main-stream skepticism is viewed.

I would feel stupid celebrating, or even acknowledging, the fact it got the trains running on time she did an OK video on a tame subject, without firmly embedding it all within the bigger picture.

BTW - our NBF has already reneged on two legit videos a week, with at least one being on feminism. Nope, pointing to the continuation of her existing regime of pre SGU Funtimes does not cut the mustard. And where the hell is her song reward?

Fraud, huckster and cancer.

[Brive1987]

SGU tonight, Science or Fiction.

One item related to:

slyme based computing.

They all played straight faced, but I got a smile out of it.

[Jan Steen]

http://i.imgur.com/v5IFGEw.jpg

(No, this isn't me. Scout's honour.)

[Mykeru]

To be blunt, what the hell does it matter if Becky makes a passing video about cold readings?

It's important because, as far as I know, no one has ever discussed Cold Reading before. Ever.

Oh wait, no. Cold reading has been done so extensively by her betters, such as Randi, Gardener, Nickell, that she could write about it with the most cursory research. Hell, there's a How Stuff Works on Cold Reading she could crib off of. Not only does picking that show how lazy she is, but it also demonstrates how limited her view of the scope of skeptical topics is.

http://static1.businessinsider.com/imag ... -minus.jpg

And hell, she doesn't even play sports.

[Brive1987]

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

Not me either ....

[James Caruthers]

Whoops, my joke was ruined by the link being not legit enough.

[youtube]s3F3RvWX2g4[/youtube]
^Typical slymepitter.

"Don't thank me, thank rape."

I mean, isn't that exactly what people on the slymepit were saying after Elevatorgate? :naughty:

[Brive1987]

Yes, yes, embrace your hate ...

http://i.imgur.com/2SPTecd.jpg

[Jan Steen]

I have noticed that the Commentariat shun the use of Gumby quotes since the Midnight Marauder(s) started to quote Peezus and Horde members in these. One could call this a civilizing influence. :lol:

[AnonymousCowherd]

Sorry to labour this point, but I read Cuze's respondents on Reddit and they seem to be beside the point.

If K says B did behaviour X (which could be unwanted touching, pat on the bum, ravishment in the hallway, etc) that is one thing. In investigating the truth of K's claim, the civil court can then decide if behaviour X took place or not.

But, as I understand it, K's claim is stronger than that i.e. that X constitutes "sexual assault". Now, to the extent that sexual assault is a term referring to criminal behaviour, K is in effect making a judgment that rightly belongs to a criminal court, and any civil court agreeing with her is therefore making the same judgment which is surely outside their purview. It also means her claim is potentially libel "per se".

Even if the civil court finds that B did carry out behaviour X, that would not prove the truth of the claim that was actually made by K. B could have done X, but not have committed a sexual assault. If that is allowed, B's case is strong.

If, on the other hand, the court decides to treat the case as "did B do X?", he will have a lot more trouble proving his side, and it will also mean he has to show that K's statements are defamatory as they are no longer being treated as claims (or imputations) of criminal behaviour (hence not "per se" libel).

In short, if K had said "B honked my boob" and had a witness, the claim is not only clear, but she has evidence for it. But when K says B "sexually assaulted" her, it's not at all clear what she is claiming other than that B committed a crime involving some unspecified behaviour.

I'm sure there is a pragmatic solution to this that the courts adopt, I'm just interested in their rationalisation for it. Perhaps it will all be clearer when the various court papers are filed.

Right now though, I wouldn't want to be in either of their shoes. At the minute, B is no doubt kicking himself and K may be sipping Champers, but unless they have been through a lengthy legal matter they will have no idea what twists, turns, disappointments and surprises await them, all while the meter is ticking. It's a grind that no-one in their right mind does willingly, and something of an indulgence for rich corporations, rather than we proles.

[Brive1987]

I have noticed that the Commentariat shun the use of Gumby quotes since the Midnight Marauder(s) started to quote Peezus and Horde members in these. One could call this a civilizing influence. :lol:

The risk of instant mockery must be a bracingly exotic prospect in general :shock:

[guest]

Stollznow has now reached over $44000 which is way over her $30000 goal. But where were the social justice warriors in these other Indiegogo campaigns for harassment in the workplace? These campaigns didn't receive a single cent! 








Why is Stollznow so damn more important than these other victims of sexual harassment? Is it because they weren't outspoken skeptics and atheists?

There's lots of fundraisers that fail for many reasons.  But yes the skepchicks have always been selective in who they support with their higher profile -- it's not unusual for any groups to clique and limit signals. 


Skepchicks pretent that they will support any good project but its bullshit.


I have a theory that Karen Stollznow's fundraiser was started in response to Ben Radfords?


-- Ben's RocketHub (or the rewards listed) given at03/23/14. First donor is Barbara Dresher. Did she tell anyone? Did anyone bother?


---Karen's Indiegogo campaign started on the 03/27/14.

as for Rebecca Watson making it onto Ellen --- it's not the first time shes had ambitions to get onto mainstream tv and she hasn't the qualifications, long term experience and genuine hard griff & legitimate contacts in media of a Randi or intense study of a Loxton lwho is only formally qualified in art but has written professionally and researched correctly for years) or the publishing beyond her own crappy sites and insider cliques support.

one or two boyfriend produced videos does not a professional skeptic or representative make. Stuck to computer games and beer reviews.

[guest]

Stollznow has now reached over $44000 which is way over her $30000 goal. But where were the social justice warriors in these other Indiegogo campaigns for harassment in the workplace? These campaigns didn't receive a single cent! 








Why is Stollznow so damn more important than these other victims of sexual harassment? Is it because they weren't outspoken skeptics and atheists?

There's lots of fundraisers that fail for many reasons.  But yes the skepchicks have always been selective in who they support with their higher profile -- it's not unusual for any groups to clique and limit signals. 


Skepchicks pretent that they will support any good project but its bullshit.


I have a theory that Karen Stollznow's fundraiser was started in response to Ben Radfords?


-- Ben's RocketHub (or the rewards listed) given at03/23/14. First donor is Barbara Dresher. Did she tell anyone? Did anyone bother?


---Karen's Indiegogo campaign started on the 03/27/14.

as for Rebecca Watson making it onto Ellen --- it's not the first time shes had ambitions to get onto mainstream tv and she hasn't the qualifications, long term experience and genuine hard griff & legitimate contacts in media of a Randi or intense study of a Loxton lwho is only formally qualified in art but has written professionally and researched correctly for years) or the publishing beyond her own crappy sites and insider cliques support.

one or two boyfriend produced videos does not a professional skeptic or representative make. Stuck to computer games and beer reviews.

[Hunt]

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... ent-774627

Dear Unholy Fuck I am hungover. Never never drink that drink. Never. My brain. My poor poor brain. I blame all of you. You utter shower of bastards.

You should have worshipped Spiderman like I told you when the Religio-Troll-festation began. Then I wouldn’t have to do it. LOOK WHAT YOU MADE ME DO!

It has nothing to do with Leicester winning the rugby yesterday and a remarkable lack of self control on my part. That’s right out.

Louis

Getting drunk off your ass and battling creatards on Pharyngula. For some this constitutes a good Saturday night.

Uh, Louis...Louis...are you listening? Let me whisper this in your ear......

GET A FUCKING LIFE!

[JackSkeptic]

But where I live is also the least religious place on earth. Its so low that in one recent survey researchers couldn't find anyone who actually believes under age 30 or what it was, suggesting that religion will be gone in a generation or two if nothing crazy happens in the meantime.

It's funny, the main thing that drew me into the whole "A/S" thing was that I'd pretty much gone through life and the numbers of believers who were openly religious that I'd encountered was less than what I could count with my both hands*. I wanted to know how and why people believed, because the whole notion just seemed entirely ridiculous to me.

The ironic thing is that it's really after seeing the FTB SJW-inspired meltdown that I've fully realized that creationists really aren't that different from other ideologues, at the core there's the same sort of mechanics at work.

*I'm serious: Two Jehova's wittnesses in my class (creationists! pretty much unheard of in Sweden), one priest who'd became teacher at my school, a local priests and her assistant, one old lady at my first temp-job, one of my uni professors, and two of my uni classmates. That's all the people I've ever gotten to know who've been openly religious...

That's exactly why I was drawn into the SJW issue. I saw them as a religious cult based on ignorance and hate. It has all the hallmarks I would associate with extremists. I simply could not believe the A/S community was falling for this crap, which is why I am here. I also happen to despite the US propensity to politicize everything. Atheism has nothing to do with someone's political beliefs. If the SJW's want to spout their nonsense they should be honest and join or form a movement for that purpose. Otherwise they are simply parasites who screw over anyone who is not in total agreement with them.

[JackSkeptic]

I think some people are messing with Spike13 deliberately at this point.

Then again, my omniscience tells me a lot of people hate me for being a robotic kitteh deity. :crying-green:

Thanks Robokitty,

They are right though. That was a mess. The criticism does help.

Stop being reasonable, it's no fun. You're like a mouse that stops running.

[Slipterid]

Support your local cats:

http://9gag.com/gag/aAYZRG9

Just de-lurking for a moment (with temporary permission of my furry masters and mistresses) to say YES older kittehs can be so wonderful. I "foster" for my local charity and I have 13 long-term residents in my care, all of them wonderful and quirky even if "damaged". Luckily nobody wants to adopt one so I get to keep them :D :dance: :dance: :D

And I wanted to say how much you people in the slyme brighten my days. Thank you.

OK back to lurking, they only gave me a couple of minutes time out for good behaviour. I cleaned their litter-trays well this morning and produced extra chicken.

[JackSkeptic]

*SNIP*

I liked Rebecca Watson's video. In fact, I think it is her best since the other good one she made about douches some years ago (which was a lecture). There was nothing new in it, yes, and all she says was pointed out before, yes, but that doesn't affect the quality. It's just not that interesting if it's all known to you, but her target is this show and she might make a difference. And indeed, PZ Myers is correct, that's a good one.

True, it was a nice enough take down of Ellen and that disgusting psychic (a tautology).

But if you listen to the last minute, it turns out to be a plea by Becky to get herself an invite onto Ellen's show.

I'm a skeptic, let her change my mind. Or better yet,let her change the mind of James Randi...She'll even have a head start, considering that we both have Wikipedia pages."

So now Becky is placing herself alongside Randi in the pantheon of great skeptics? Oh,my.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

If she has done a good video, in fact if anyone does a good video, in support of A/S principles then I do not care one bit who they are. I am pleased as we need as much out there as we can. Also, I really have no issue with some self promotion. Everyone does it and for good reason. The issue I have with Watson is the way she will switch to a bitter hate on for 'Atheist men' which I really do not want to listen to without some evidence. She will mix a charity appeal with an attack on men (she said it was a joke but I do not buy that)

If Myer's is her mentor he has taught her badly. He has a one track mind and mixes up science, feminism and other social issues with no apparent connection but with a lot of bile. His judgement of other people's beliefs and motives is embarrassingly awful. This annoys many of his potential readers and makes him a terrible communicator to those he may be trying to reach. If Watson learns to separate the issues she cares about and only mix them when they support each other she will be a lot more effective. All the good podcasters do this (The Atheist Experience is a good example) and as Myer's does not podcast hopefully she is picking up good advice from others.

[Ape+lust]

What the feck?

Now that’s good skepticism!

Did that come with a wink and a finger shooter? Jeezus, even PZ is phoning it in.

http://imgur.com/CwU7CFj.jpg

As you were, Peez. Sorry to interrupt.

http://imgur.com/QzAR4tS.jpg

[JackSkeptic]

Via Reddit:

http://i.imgur.com/oN2TV84.png

Professor of Social Justice Historical Blah-Blah-Blah in the making.

India, South Africa.

[Tigzy]

I liked Rebecca Watson's video. In fact, I think it is her best since the other good one she made about douches some years ago (which was a lecture). There was nothing new in it, yes, and all she says was pointed out before, yes, but that doesn't affect the quality. It's just not that interesting if it's all known to you, but her target is this show and she might make a difference. And indeed, PZ Myers is correct, that's a good one.

I thought it was shit, as usual. Though I admit, I didn't watch the whole thing - the spud-faced void's natural charisma and charm ensured that. In any case, my point was more about Myers' vapid 'gee whiz!' response to it, which was ably mocked by ApeLust above. Honestly, Glob could do a video of herself deploying those fulsome gnashers in the service of some graphic coprophagy, and Myers would find it thoroughly wonderful. And not in a sexual sense, either. Though I wouldn't discount that possibility.

[zenbabe]

What the feck?

Now that’s good skepticism!

Did that come with a wink and a finger shooter? Jeezus, even PZ is phoning it in.

http://imgur.com/CwU7CFj.jpg

It really had a "mmm MMM that IS a tasty burger!" aspect to it.

As you were, Peez. Sorry to interrupt.

http://imgur.com/QzAR4tS.jpg

omg APE! No!
Noooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!

:lol:

[Tigzy]

BTW, Phil - cos you're such a seriously nice dude, I took it upon myself to put in a plug for Fairyland - on FTB no less. :-D

http://freethoughtblogs.com/marginoferr ... mment-1198

[windy]

Today's Star Trek Parable

[youtube]Dcr-V_G6B4o[/youtube]

Commentary:
http://i.imgur.com/UISqVDu.jpg

Unless I'm completely misremembering something I read in Alan Turing: The Enigma, I think Alan Turing was the first to come up with that strategy.

Nice of him to leave in that 'back door' in case superintelligent computers try to take over some day...

[Tigzy]

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

You think we could try something like this with Steersman?

[Tigzy]

http://i.imgur.com/JBtbDaE.png

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

BTW, Phil - cos you're such a seriously nice dude, I took it upon myself to put in a plug for Fairyland - on FTB no less. :-D

http://freethoughtblogs.com/marginoferr ... mment-1198

Yeah, that should go over well enough. Thanksies.

[piginthecity]

What the feck?
As you were, Peez. Sorry to interrupt.

http://imgur.com/QzAR4tS.jpg

I denounce and condemn this photoshop by Ape+Lust !

[Lsuoma]

Another view of this Peezy incident:

http://www.tatp.org/blog/wp-content/upl ... n0382b.jpg

[Matt Cavanaugh]

vhttp://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2014/03/29/weekly-craziness-from-readers/

So Jerry gets trolled by some jerk implying a kitten named after him might fall into the hands of a New Zealand group that's apparently for people euthanizing or sterilizing their cats due to the environmental impact caused by feral cats, then proceeds to forbid any discussion on the topic.

Now I have no expertise and no strong opinion and probably wouldn't have said anything about it anyway, but the ban on what could be a legitimate if emotional topic for discussion bothers me. I like Jerry but that's a very Peezian thing to do.

[Matt Cavanaugh]

I stopped following WEIT now that it's morphed from a science/atheism blog into an official organ of the Democrat Party.

[Really?]

I stopped following WEIT now that it's morphed from a science/atheism blog into an official organ of the Democrat Party.

I wonder what the organs of the Republic Party look like.

[Southern]

And here's a lovely, compassionate response from the comments, which shows just how inclusive Meyers's people are:

http://i.imgur.com/Oz3DrfX.png

[youtube]i9fFfYKvDgk[/youtube]

[youtube]wwBhLoiolKw[/youtube]

[free thoughtpolice]

BTW, Phil - cos you're such a seriously nice dude, I took it upon myself to put in a plug for Fairyland - on FTB no less. :-D

http://freethoughtblogs.com/marginoferr ... mment-1198

I put a plug in too.

abear

March 30, 2014 at 5:46 pm (UTC 0)

Kaveh: I also recommend you give a listen to Fairyland.
If it weren’t for Phillipe Giordana being a total dudebro his music would be really cool.

There you go Phil; a foothold in the Iranian metal market!

[Southern]

What the feck?

Now that’s good skepticism!

Did that come with a wink and a finger shooter? Jeezus, even PZ is phoning it in.

http://imgur.com/CwU7CFj.jpg

As you were, Peez. Sorry to interrupt.

http://imgur.com/QzAR4tS.jpg

When I think I'm finally healed my PTSD, here comes Ape+Lust to traumatize me again. Gee, thanks for the image, now I'm going to cry in a corner.

[free thoughtpolice]

I stopped following WEIT now that it's morphed from a science/atheism blog into an official organ of the Democrat Party.

I wonder what the organs of the Republic Party look like.

I'm guessing no heart and lots of gall.