Nerds. Nerds EVERYWHERE...

[JackSkeptic]

At least Andy does not go off on demented diatribes and he seems to possess a sense of humour, rare amongst SJW's. I also feel he may be trolling. He has Oolon written all over him but it is impossible to tell with them so it does not really matter.

As far as I am concerned it is Myers who needs to address Nugents points outside an environment he can't control but he is a coward so he won't. I do not give a damn about Myers though. I like what Nugent is doing because it exposes the moral bankruptcy of SJW's in general.

[ThreeFlangedJavis]

Something tells me that someone has never fired a gun in a combat situation.

Combat?!? An eigtheen-year-old versus a trained police officer is now combat? The heavens forbid that your army should ever have to go to war.

6ft4, 292lb. You're right, Ferguson should have led him home by the ear and told his parents.

[feathers]

Yes, arguing that the officer was somehow incompetent because the use of his gun resulted in death rather than incapacitation is absurd. The reason why police are given guns is to have a method of lethal force, period. Of course, one can legitimately argue against the policy of police being equipped with weapons of lethal force. But if an officer is equipped with a gun and justifiably uses it in self defense, it's not his fault that death is the outcome.

But if your only resort seems to be lethal force, soon everyone becomes a target. And dead.

[bovarchist]

Yeap, Dana Gould has now deleted EVERY tweet we exchanged, around twenty in all. Guess I can cross kicking the ass of a Simpsons writer off my bucket list.

My favorite part was when he said that I quit watching Simpsons after three seasons because that was when they started using big words. Yeah, people quit watching because the show got too smart. Is pulling my leg considered rape nowadays?

[BlueShiftRhino]

Weird question: if I were to tell Andy "not Adam" Andy that every post that he aims at me on MN's blog will be replied to with something making fun of PZ, would that be considered to be something like doxxing?

[bovarchist]

Yes, arguing that the officer was somehow incompetent because the use of his gun resulted in death rather than incapacitation is absurd. The reason why police are given guns is to have a method of lethal force, period. Of course, one can legitimately argue against the policy of police being equipped with weapons of lethal force. But if an officer is equipped with a gun and justifiably uses it in self defense, it's not his fault that death is the outcome.

But if your only resort seems to be lethal force, soon everyone becomes a target. And dead.

You make it sound like he saw Wilson jaywalking and just opened fire. For the record, I'd be against that.

[Shatterface as Guest]

Ruth Hunt of Stonewall on how teh gays in Brunei prefer Sharia:

What gay people in Brunei tell Stonewall, Hunt explains, is that sharia law is in fact much easier for them, because you need witnesses, so fewer will be prosecuted than under the old law. “The important campaigning issues around sharia law in Brunei are actually about women. So posh, rich, white western gays saying: ‘What about the gays in Brunei?’ is singularly the most unhelpful thing we could do.” Activists in Brunei are carefully focusing their campaign against the stoning of women, and the last thing they wanted, Hunt says, was a western gay lobby trying to make Brunei “solely about LGBT issues”. It might have made gays in London feel good about themselves. But all it did in Brunei was “perpetuate the idea that ‘gay’ is a western affliction, and distract from the campaigning goal, which was about stoning”. If you can explain that, she laughs drily, “without making me look like Neville Chamberlain, that would be great”.

http://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/ ... ght-police

- Shatterface

[BlueShiftRhino]

My impression is that most of us agree on the if...then statements concerning the use of lethal force, both in Ferguson and Florida. The dispute is whether the trigger conditions (as it were) had been met in each case.

Between getting some work done and replying to Andy "not Adam" Andy, I did a bit more reading - that I should have done before - and I'm coming around to the position that, in Ferguson, there appears to be no convincing evidence against this claim (which is usually sufficient when a cop did the shooting) and there's actually decent positive evidence that the conditions were met. I'd try to use the excuse that I fell for the story that the "mainstream" media was selling, but that would just add another error on top of my first.

[John Greg]

I posted this over at Avi's wee home of intellectual delights (http://freethoughtblogs.com/amilliongod ... nt-1467964). It reflects my current theory regarding the thought processes, as it were, of SJWs.

It is SOP for FTB folks, and most other SJWs, to misrepresent Dawkins (and all other enemies of the SJL state). He is, after all, old, white, cis, rich, and THE ENEMY, and he is also successful, popular, active, influential, intelligent, and a host of other things that most SJWs only dream about ever being.

I used to think that the misrepresentation was simply a reflection of a myopic and profoundly stubborn ideological difference. I have rather recently changed that opinion.

What I now suspect is really going on is that the general SJW mindset is similar to what is posited in some of the recent theories on religiosity, which suggests that there may in fact be some kind of brain damage or mys/malfunction, somewhat related to OCD, that precludes the ability to think clearly, logically, and critically, and thereby actually comprehend what THE ENEMY is actually saying. The damaged mind is beset by chthonic nightmares of a sort of paranoid delusion that, when it once encounters any form of disagreement (and/or encounters an in-group meme of emotional importance), harkens back to a preset group of memes, tropes, and other sets of immovable personal truths and assumptions and in-group socio-cultural definitions.

Of course, I have no proofs, or citations, or other evidences of this theory; it is simply a personal theory based on observation.

:think:

[another lurker]

My personal theory, based on my personal feelies, is that you're all bronies.

[comhcinc]

My personal theory, based on my personal feelies, is that you're all bronies.

I am.

http://ih0.redbubble.net/image.12088083 ... 360.u1.png

This page just became 10% cooler.

[Michael J]

That implies he meant to kill, rather than maim by shooting in the arm or leg. Ok.

Son, if you don't mean to kill, a gun is the wrong weapon to use.

Yes, arguing that the officer was somehow incompetent because the use of his gun resulted in death rather than incapacitation is absurd. The reason why police are given guns is to have a method of lethal force, period. Of course, one can legitimately argue against the policy of police being equipped with weapons of lethal force. But if an officer is equipped with a gun and justifiably uses it in self defense, it's not his fault that death is the outcome.

I had friends who were police and they are taught not to try to shoot to incapacitate because you will invariably miss and also with (in Australia at least) the low calibre guns police use people tend not to stop when shot they keep coming. Aim for the body and you will hit something.

[Michael J]

That implies he meant to kill, rather than maim by shooting in the arm or leg. Ok.

Son, if you don't mean to kill, a gun is the wrong weapon to use.

Yes, arguing that the officer was somehow incompetent because the use of his gun resulted in death rather than incapacitation is absurd. The reason why police are given guns is to have a method of lethal force, period. Of course, one can legitimately argue against the policy of police being equipped with weapons of lethal force. But if an officer is equipped with a gun and justifiably uses it in self defense, it's not his fault that death is the outcome.

I had friends who were police and they are taught not to try to shoot to incapacitate because you will invariably miss and also with (in Australia at least) the low calibre guns police use people tend not to stop when shot they keep coming. Aim for the body and you will hit something.

[Guestus Aurelius]

Like any situation in which 2 sides differ vehemently on what happened, there may be at least a grain of truth in each's version. I don't feel like I know enough about the shooting of Michael Brown to come to a conclusion one way or another.

Sure seems like body cameras on cops would allow for a more objective view, after the fact, for both sides or all sides to examine & at least have something firmer to hold onto when trying to discuss what happened.

The privacy intrusion aspect does concern me, though (esp for passersby, those found not to be in violation of any law, etc). There's a discussion planned soon at work about this, as some patients arrive with a police escort, & before too long those escorts may be wearing cameras.

[anecdote so take this with a grain of salt] I recall a traffic stop in Texas that made the news a few years ago. A sweet little old grandmother had gone on TV news to tell the sad tale of how she'd been unjustly assaulted by a police officer...only it turns out the officer's dash-cam had been on the whole time and showed the situation escalating over about 15 minutes as the woman refused to cooperate: she argued with the officer, refused to comply with his requests, threatened to get out her gun (but didn't), then got out of her truck & tried to walk away along the side of the highway, then (as I recall) pushed him when he tried to stop her. At each step he maintained a polite professional demeanor and appeared to only do what he had to do to maintain safety, to try to get her to cooperate, & to use the least force needed to subdue her when she got physical with him. I found the video to be quite impressive in its ability to convey the fly-on-the-wall's view of the event as it unfolded. (And of course it would just as readily have shown the version she told on TV to be accurate, if that's how it had really happened.) [/anecdote]

That's why I trust the grand jury decision. They had information that I and the rioters, protestors, and SJW's did not. Except for PZ because Carrie Poppy told him that Wilson totally raped Brown, before shooting him.
Body cams seem like a good idea, protects the public from rogue cops and protects cops from accusations of brutality.

I agree with both of you.

Skep tickle is (as usual) right on the money here. There can be truth to multiple sides of the story.

There are several witnesses who saw more or less the whole thing go down, and they essentially agree on the basic order of events but disagree in their interpretations of Wilson's and Brown's intentions.

For example, witnesses agree that when Brown first turned around to face Wilson after being told to "stop," he made some sort of gesture with his hand at his side. Wilson's description of that gesture was that Brown tucked his hand under his shirt at his waist. One witness said that it looked like Brown was maybe pulling his pants up. Another witness's description makes it seem like Brown's gesture had to do with examining or nursing his hand. That last possibility makes the most sense to me, since his thumb had been grazed by a bullet seconds earlier during the tussle at the car. But given everything that had just transpired, it makes perfect sense that Wilson would have taken the gesture as a threat, regardless of Brown's intention.

Witnesses also agree that Brown started moving toward Wilson before Wilson opened fire. Was he "charging"? Or was he approaching slowly as if to surrender? Witnesses disagree on that point, but they agree that Brown started to move forward once again after Wilson's first volley of shots. Was Brown's second (and final) approach "charging"? Or was he stumbling forward because he'd just been shot? I'd guess the latter, but witnesses aren't on the same page with each other about that. The witnesses agree, however, that both of Wilson's volleys came after Brown started moving toward him upon being ordered to stop.

Were Brown's hands up as he approached Wilson? That's unclear, too. Some witnesses say that his hands were "up," but not "all the way" up. But he'd been shot, too, so maybe he was trying to put them all the way up but couldn't? Or maybe he really was "charging" and had his arms in front of him (i.e., not "up")? The conflicting testimony doesn't resolve this.

My guess is that from the grand jury's perspective, Brown's actions leading up to his death (strong-arm robbery, altercation with Wilson at the car) gave Wilson every reason to be on red alert when in pursuit and to interpret Brown's ensuing actions (the gesture, and then approaching Wilson when told to stop) as threatening. Witness testimony supports Wilson's chronology but leaves a lot of room for interpretation of what certain actions meant. And Brown's DNA was all over Wilson's gun, which lends credence to Wilson's description of the events in the car.

I'm pretty ignorant about how grand jury investigations go, though. It's clear that there's not nearly enough evidence to convict Wilson of a crime of malice, so as a non-lawyer I "get" the decision not to prosecute for such a crime. The grand jury's decision suggests that there's not nearly enough evidence to convict him of any actus reus, either, but that leaves me scratching my non-lawyer head a little. When Wilson fired his first volley of shots outside, Brown wasn't very close to him. Witnesses agree on that. I'm kind of surprised that that fact alone doesn't constitute "probable cause" to prosecute Wilson for something—using deadly force unnecessarily. Then again, I don't know the law.

I only hope that the grand jury's decision was based on the evidence and the evidence alone. And I wish more people felt that way.

[another lurker]

I want to shovel snow and install my new SSD, but my kitty is sitting on my neck and I can't move as a result.

[Lsuoma]

I want to shovel snow and install my new SSD, but my kitty is sitting on my neck and I can't move as a result.

FT ProTip: don't install your SSD in shoveled snow. This has been a public information announcement.

That is all. Thank you.

[another lurker]

I want to shovel snow and install my new SSD, but my kitty is sitting on my neck and I can't move as a result.

FT ProTip: don't install your SSD in shoveled snow. This has been a public information announcement.

That is all. Thank you.

Stop mansplaining!!!!

I have to replace my year old SSD - Samsung 840 - because I am getting endless CRC errors and windows won't boot without extensive repair. The confusing thing is, Samsung Magic and SMART report that the drive is 100% healthy. I am at a loss, and not even sure I can RMA it if there are no detectable problems!

[BlueShiftRhino]

Boo hoo. MN has had enough of my fun and games and is now moderating my posts. Oh, well. It was fun while it lasted.

[John D]

Greta blocks a black atheist who has an opinion about Ferguson... haha. She's as bad as PZ these days. God damn, I hate these people.

http://barrierbreaker.hubpages.com/hub/ ... evelopment

[BlueShiftRhino]

Or is a "SJW" a trigger word for Mr. Nugent?

[Brive1987]

I had friends who were police and they are taught not to try to shoot to incapacitate because you will invariably miss and also with (in Australia at least) the low calibre guns police use people tend not to stop when shot they keep coming. Aim for the body and you will hit something.

The drill for anyone with a weapon and serious intent is to "aim for the centre of the seen mass"

Not peripheral appendages.

This too is wisdom from the ages.

[jugheadnaut]

When Wilson fired his first volley of shots outside, Brown wasn't very close to him. Witnesses agree on that. I'm kind of surprised that that fact alone doesn't constitute "probable cause" to prosecute Wilson for something—using deadly force unnecessarily. Then again, I don't know the law.

I'm not sure how you define "very close", but the witness testimony and other evidence all seem to indicate he was no more than 20 feet away when he started moving towards Wilson, and about 4 feet away when the final bullets him. That's easily close enough for Brown to be an immediate threat. I think the idea that the shootings occurred from a significant distance were based on the reports that they occurred a significant distance from the police car. I guess people assumed Wilson was shooting from in or near the car. But he wasn't. He was following Brown ordering him to stop.

[BlueShiftRhino]

The drill for anyone with a weapon and serious intent is to "aim for the centre of the seen mass"

Yep. Followed by: if two in the chest do not put him or her down, switch to the face ... might be wearing a vest.

[Shatterface as Guest]

Greta blocks a black atheist who has an opinion about Ferguson... haha. She's as bad as PZ these days. God damn, I hate these people.

http://barrierbreaker.hubpages.com/hub/ ... evelopment

I've no sympathy really, watching them all turn on each other.

From the comments below:

Greta established a clear boundary, based on her emotions toward a situation. You chose to violate that boundary. I am surprised that you feel you should be able to do this without consequence. You too have become very emotional over a situation and have expected people to trend lightly around you while you dealt with these emotions.

It's all about who feels the deepest.

- Shatterface

[John Greg]

Oh my. Avi is going on again about being pre-emptively blocked from the Pit. Jesus, when he gets a lie between his papadums, he just cannot let go.

link: http://freethoughtblogs.com/amilliongod ... nt-1468053

[Guestus Aurelius]

I was specifically talking about the first volley of shots, jugheadnaut, but you're right, I didn't define "very close." And I also don't know what would constitute close enough that, given the circumstances, Wilson's initial use of deadly force was so unambiguously justified that there's not even probable cause to indict.

Please take me at my word when I say "I'm kind of surprised" and "I don't know." Those are musings—not arguments—of an admitted ignoramus.

[Lsuoma]

Oh my. Avi is going on again about being pre-emptively blocked from the Pit. Jesus, when he gets a lie between his papadums, he just cannot let go.

link: http://freethoughtblogs.com/amilliongod ... nt-1468053

Couple of things:

1. First, https://archive.today/MZSNS
2. Second, those fuck-awful ads take a long time to load.

[paddybrown]

An interesting local development that I think sheds light on SJWs in general.

Gerry Adams, president of Sinn Féin, which was the political mouthpiece of the IRA before the IRA disbanded, has been quoted as saying the following:

But what’s the point? The point is to actually break these bastards – that’s the point. And what’s going to break them is equality. That’s what’s going to break them – equality. Who could be afraid of equality? Who could be afraid of treating somebody the way you want to be treated. That’s what we need to keep the focus on – that’s the trojan horse of the entire republican strategy – is to reach out to people on the basis of equality.

As unionist politician Arlene Foster (atypically) astutely points out, "A Trojan Horse is a weapon dressed up as a gift." This is the whole basis of Social Justice Warriordom - campaign on issues that more or less everybody, in principle, agrees on, but use them as a wedge to force through their rather more specific agenda. Everybody's against rape, right? So they use the issue of rape to undermine due process and the presumption of innocence, and anyone who has a problem with that is loudly denounced as a rape apologist, a provider of a haven for rapists, or an actual rapist. They're not well-meaning people getting carried away. If Gerry Adams is anything to go by, at least some of them know exactly what they're doing.

[Brive1987]

There appear to be a couple of self evident truths at play here.

1. Do not conflate macro racial and economic inequities with your one on one dealings with police. Taking on a cop is not clever SJ or proactive civil disobedience. It's just fucking stupid.

2. Always comply with police directives immediately and unambiguously. Especially if you belong to a visible social group with higher than average crime rates.

Doing this won't necessarily stop unprofessional police behaviour, but failure to follow these 'truths' will have foreseeable consequences. [/patronising self evident lecture]

[Tapir]

[

Greta blocks a black atheist who has an opinion about Ferguson... haha. She's as bad as PZ these days. God damn, I hate these people.

http://barrierbreaker.hubpages.com/hub/ ... evelopment

I've no sympathy really, watching them all turn on each other.

From the comments below:

Greta established a clear boundary, based on her emotions toward a situation. You chose to violate that boundary. I am surprised that you feel you should be able to do this without consequence. You too have become very emotional over a situation and have expected people to trend lightly around you while you dealt with these emotions.

It's all about who feels the deepest.

- Shatterface

A picture is worth a thousand pouncetugs....

http://i.imgur.com/N4c15sK.jpg

[Guestus Aurelius]

(Although, in Christina's "defense," she apparently warned from the start that she'd say "Go fuck yourself. Blocked." to anyone who dissented, so it wasn't really targeted at this particular fellow per se.)

[jugheadnaut]

I was specifically talking about the first volley of shots, jugheadnaut, but you're right, I didn't define "very close." And I also don't know what would constitute close enough that, given the circumstances, Wilson's initial use of deadly force was so unambiguously justified that there's not even probable cause to indict.

Please take me at my word when I say "I'm kind of surprised" and "I don't know." Those are musings—not arguments—of an admitted ignoramus.

I fully respect that you are at the seeking information stage and not the conclusions stage. The one thing you seemed pretty sure of, though, is that they were at a significant distance and thus it's questionable whether Brown was an immediate threat when the shots started. I think the evidence is clear that's not the case. 20 feet is pretty close, and the first shots likely came from less than that. It's ground that can easily be made up in 1-2 seconds if he was charging. The fact Brown got to within 4 feet by the time he was put down clearly shows Wilson didn't start shooting too soon.

[Brive1987]

...........

http://i.imgur.com/f3LbfPk.jpg

And in spite of the earlier warning, the suddenness of it was stunning. No discussion. No exchange. No examination. No honest inquiry. Just a cold block and an outright refusal, it seemed, to consider the issue further. What bothered me was not just the block on me, but also the message it was sending -- that evidence and facts were unimportant. Emotions could judge the situation, and if someone was struggling with facts in the face of emotions, emotions could get rid of facts. I thought this was unhealthy -- that's really why I'm writing about it.

Bless him.

[Guestus Aurelius]

I was specifically talking about the first volley of shots, jugheadnaut, but you're right, I didn't define "very close." And I also don't know what would constitute close enough that, given the circumstances, Wilson's initial use of deadly force was so unambiguously justified that there's not even probable cause to indict.

Please take me at my word when I say "I'm kind of surprised" and "I don't know." Those are musings—not arguments—of an admitted ignoramus.

I fully respect that you are at the seeking information stage and not the conclusions stage. The one thing you seemed pretty sure of, though, is that they were at a significant distance and thus it's questionable whether Brown was an immediate threat when the shots started. I think the evidence is clear that's not the case. 20 feet is pretty close, and the first shots likely came from less than that. It's ground that can easily be made up in 1-2 seconds if he was charging. The fact Brown got to within 4 feet by the time he was put down clearly shows Wilson didn't start shooting too soon.

Fair enough.

[Kirbmarc]

at least some of them know exactly what they're doing.

I've always thought that some of them know what they're doing. Maybe PZ is a little clueless, maybe Anita is just a con woman, but there are a few people behind the SJW movement who know that they want to change society according to a precise ideological plan. They want to change the law to suit their purposes. They want to be paid for doing nothing of value.

[Brive1987]

Ninja'd by imgur's slow upload.

On that note I usually type imgr and click the google result to imgur on the iPad. Faster than going to bookmarks.

Sometimes I mistype imhr. This takes me to the "independent miniature horse registry"

I don't get angry though. Sometimes I smile.

[free thoughtpolice]

(Although, in Christina's "defense," she apparently warned from the start that she'd say "Go fuck yourself. Blocked." to anyone who dissented, so it wasn't really targeted at this particular fellow per se.)

I disagree, I think Christina is a racist that silenced a POC after whitesplaining to him that only her white supremacist opinion matters. :P

[Michael J]

I want to shovel snow and install my new SSD, but my kitty is sitting on my neck and I can't move as a result.

FT ProTip: don't install your SSD in shoveled snow. This has been a public information announcement.

That is all. Thank you.

Stop mansplaining!!!!

I have to replace my year old SSD - Samsung 840 - because I am getting endless CRC errors and windows won't boot without extensive repair. The confusing thing is, Samsung Magic and SMART report that the drive is 100% healthy. I am at a loss, and not even sure I can RMA it if there are no detectable problems!

I might be Ninj'd but that sounds more like a cable or a motherboard issue

[Brive1987]

I'm glad that amidst his own troubles and surrounded by the fall of civilisation, Radford can find simple solace.

The question is of course, was that a full bag yesterday .... ? :o

[John D]

(Although, in Christina's "defense," she apparently warned from the start that she'd say "Go fuck yourself. Blocked." to anyone who dissented, so it wasn't really targeted at this particular fellow per se.)

I disagree, I think Christina is a racist that silenced a POC after whitesplaining to him that only her white supremacist opinion matters. :P

Actually, she is a hypocrite who claims to use facts to make decisions, and yet ignores the forensic evidence from three independent autopsies. She is the Oprah Winfrey of skepticism.

[dog puke]

The pee ain't yellow, it's chicken.

Now THAT'S epic callback!

Enough of the Zimmerman issue...

[Brive1987]

Oprah was an oppressed poc and a woman. Her story is one of society's clear warnings on patriarchy.

[dog puke]

Greta Christina is just plain weird. WTF does this even mean?

http://i.imgur.com/zugD0Qq.jpg

[free thoughtpolice]

(Although, in Christina's "defense," she apparently warned from the start that she'd say "Go fuck yourself. Blocked." to anyone who dissented, so it wasn't really targeted at this particular fellow per se.)

I disagree, I think Christina is a racist that silenced a POC after whitesplaining to him that only her white supremacist opinion matters. :P

Actually, she is a hypocrite who claims to use facts to make decisions, and yet ignores the forensic evidence from three independent autopsies. She is the Oprah Winfrey of skepticism.

I agree Greta is a hypocrite, in fact I called her out for hypocrisy some time ago and was immediately banned for doing so.
Oprah Winfrey, not so much. They both are dingbats that have a tenuous grasp on reality, but Oprah is a hard working. at least somewhat talented and wealthy and successful.
Greta is a third rate hack with a blog that has a handful of readers and the author of a silly little pamphlet with rapey unicorn porn in it.

[dog puke]

I mean really. What is she on about????? Is she the fucking fashion police?

http://i.imgur.com/5cNKlci.png

[Michael J]

Help request. Has anyone filed away the FB George Hrab screen grab of his views on PZ and Rebecca? Thanks in advance. :)

I enacted the labour to track it down.

http://nobodygetsoffended.wordpress.com ... orge-hrab/

That site annoys me. I don't think that everybody has to take a side and be vocal about it 24/7. If I had a reasonable following I think I would largely shut up about it as I think that the majority of people are sick of it or don't care.

Take Nugent, is he doing more good against PZ Myers from his posts or by talking to other atheist leaders and conference organisers privately? Once the invites start drying up, I'm sure that some of that crowd may start considering their positions. While the posts seem to be preaching to the converted as most of the comments are from us or Skepticink.

[KiwiInOz]

Scientists at a gender equity in science conference (staying at the same Canberra hotel as Rebecca Watson) discover that divas make it difficult for room service.

At the risk of doxing myself…

Watson is in Canberra? That's where I live. I had no idea there were any vaguely atheist / sceptic events on this week though, and I usually try to keep abreast of stuff happening here.

You poor bugger. And Watson being there just puts the blowie on the shit sandwich.

[jugheadnaut]

at least some of them know exactly what they're doing.

I've always thought that some of them know what they're doing. Maybe PZ is a little clueless, maybe Anita is just a con woman, but there are a few people behind the SJW movement who know that they want to change society according to a precise ideological plan. They want to change the law to suit their purposes. They want to be paid for doing nothing of value.

I have a useful shibboleth for determining who the SJW drones are. If they use the xism = prejudice + power formulation in a general or public conversation, they're a drone (or a troll). The leaders know that this is just the definition preferred in SJW circles, and while they would like it to be universal, they know they look silly insisting on it with non-SJW's. The drones are just repeating what they have been taught, and think it's some kind of social insight. It's the "four legs good, two legs bad" of SJW-ism. Or one of them, anyway. There are many.

[BlueShiftRhino]

Oh my. Avi is going on again about being pre-emptively blocked from the Pit. Jesus, when he gets a lie between his papadums, he just cannot let go.

How many times did Andy "not Adam" Andy lie about a post of his being in moderation at Nugent's? Does he not know that when the post finally appears, it will have the original time and date stamp?

Oh, and MN did let my next-to-last one through. I think that "SJW" is on his list, as opposed to it being me, as my last one went through at once.

[Garlix]

Greta blocks a black atheist who has an opinion about Ferguson... haha. She's as bad as PZ these days. God damn, I hate these people.

http://barrierbreaker.hubpages.com/hub/ ... evelopment

That dude's blog actually looks pretty interesting.

http://barrierbreaker.hubpages.com/hub/ ... mmigration
http://barrierbreaker.hubpages.com/hub/ ... -Black-Man
http://barrierbreaker.hubpages.com/hub/ ... e-Atheists

Plus lots of James Baldwin videos, which is generally highly correlated with "win".

[another lurker]

FT ProTip: don't install your SSD in shoveled snow. This has been a public information announcement.

That is all. Thank you.

Stop mansplaining!!!!

I have to replace my year old SSD - Samsung 840 - because I am getting endless CRC errors and windows won't boot without extensive repair. The confusing thing is, Samsung Magic and SMART report that the drive is 100% healthy. I am at a loss, and not even sure I can RMA it if there are no detectable problems!

I might be Ninj'd but that sounds more like a cable or a motherboard issue

Thanks. Trying that now. I just scored a packet of new cables from monoprice too :)

My bf has been helping me, and for some reason he didn't suggest a cable switch. It booted into windows, so I'll have to keep an eye on it now. If all else fails, I shall have to see if installing it in the snow will help.

[BlueShiftRhino]

1. First, https://archive.today/MZSNS

Parts of that seemed quite reasonable, but it's ruined by such things as claiming that all rape is bad is somehow inconsistent with Dawkins' statement that some rapes are worse than others. Oh, and the fact that a majority of the post is one long Dear Muslima was an irony not wasted on me.

[BlueShiftRhino]

Sometimes I mistype imhr. This takes me to the "independent miniature horse registry"

I don't get angry though. Sometimes I smile.

In fact, you should either bookmark the Independent Miniature Horse Registry page or send the URL to PZ forthwith. If his dream ever comes true, it would be best if he didn't need a boost-up. That might be embarrassing for the new Horseman.

[James Caruthers]

I have something interesting to contribute to the Ferguson discussion, mostly from watching a ton of streams last night. Listened to police scanners, watched independent news heli footage, and got close with the hipsters waving iphones on the ground.

The racial breakdown was really fascinating, and it's a shame Mykers isn't here because it perfectly imitates his experiences with OWS, at least as far as I could tell from checking all the streams.

I heard at least one streamer say he came from canada. :popcorn: Fashionista SJWs, anyone? Not convinced? Let's keep going.

There was a certain coffee shop or cafe the protestors were using as a "home base." I think it even had "safe space" in the window, no joke. Getting back to the racial mixup, of course there were some black individuals near this cafe, but it was astonishing how few. Then I would go to the parts of the riot where the really bad shit was happening, like lootings and fires, and see mostly black people. Probably the native residents. I don't doubt some of the looters were opportunistic and not part of the movement, but some probably were.

So I was following this one (white) SJW on his camera, and it was really funny. Every time he talked for a little while to a group of fine black people, he'd get visibly nervous. He'd look around and see the area of the neighborhood was kind of seedy, and there weren't any other whites around, and he'd say something like "let's get back over here." Inevitably, back to the precious coffee shop. :lol: A lot of the white hipster SJW types were drinking fraps and mochas and talking about their personal oppression narratives, which included "I got shot with a nonlethal tear gas grenade while provoking cops" and "a flashbang went off in my general vicinity."

BTW, the cops were really well-behaved as far as I could see. There was much provocation and more force might even have been justifiable, but they held their ground and didn't rise to the bait.

Anyway, our hipster friend streaming did this dance of going outside, getting mixed up into a crowd, noticing the crowd was low-income African-Americans, getting visibly spooked and running to the safety of the cafe... He did this several times. :popcorn:

The only conclusion I can draw from this and what I observed in other streams is that most of the white SJW protestors huddled together for warmth and safety at the "Safe Space" cafe, and also that SJWs are sheltered little racists afraid to mingle with the black protestors. 8-)

To be fair, it would have helped the black protestors' cases on that night if they hadn't conformed to nearly every negative stereotype of low-income African-Americans.

I can only assume the smart whites and blacks went home once the protest got ugly, leaving the parade of Godfrey Elwick hipsters and 2Chains protestors stuck with each other.

(Yes, one of the rambling angry PoC protestors invoked the legendary 2Chains, and the Canadian hipsters looked more ridiculous than a Parsehole parody.) :popcorn:

Hopefully this is the end of the rioting, but I checked some livestreams and it looks like we're going to have round 2 tonight.

I hope to see PZ out there tonight, btw. :dance:

[Matt Cavanaugh]

Well, not really...it's hard to make a case that Zimmerman murdered Martin when Martin stalked Zimmerman and pounded on him for over a minute before Zimmerman even attempted to draw his gun. Do me a favor, and look at your watch for a full minute. A long time to be pounded on.

That entire altercation took place for one single reason: because Martin wanted it to. If he was afraid of Zimmerman, all he had to do was go home. It was only 200 yards away, after all.

Are you sure you got the stalking order right? Zimmerman trailed in his car, a guy walking by himself at night. He provoked an altercation. IIRC there were jurors who said they would've convicted on a lesser count if given the option.

Zimmerman didn't provoke the altercation; he didn't even precipitate the personal interaction. He observed a stranger acting suspiciously in his neighborhood , and called it in to the cops. Martin tracked back & punched Zimmerman in the face.

[Matt Cavanaugh]

Inbetween them, AndrewV69, John D and Bovarchist argue that the police can neither manage to stay in possession of their firearms, nor reliably use them if they do, without killing their opponent.

Which seems a good argument why police should not be equipped with firearms.

The cops in my hometown had a propensity for crashing their cruisers.

Which seems a good argument why police should not be equipped with cars.

[comhcinc]

Zimmerman didn't provoke the altercation; he didn't even precipitate the personal interaction. He observed a stranger acting suspiciously in his neighborhood , and called it in to the cops. Martin tracked back & punched Zimmerman in the face.

That comment doesn't make any sense.

[BlueShiftRhino]

Yes, FtBers, you have died and gone to quote-mine heaven:

Anyway, our hipster friend streaming did this dance of going outside, getting mixed up into a crowd, noticing the crowd was low-income African-Americans, getting visibly spooked and running to the safety of the cafe...

[BlueShiftRhino]

Zimmerman didn't provoke the altercation; he didn't even precipitate the personal interaction. He observed a stranger acting suspiciously in his neighborhood , and called it in to the cops. The dispatcher told him - quite clearly - to back off, not engage, and let the police do their job. Zimmerman ignored this request and continued to follow Martin for several more minutes. Martin tracked back & punched Zimmerman in the face.

FTFY

[jugheadnaut]

Take Nugent, is he doing more good against PZ Myers from his posts or by talking to other atheist leaders and conference organisers privately? Once the invites start drying up, I'm sure that some of that crowd may start considering their positions.

I've noticed a change in Amanda Marcotte's writings over the last month or so. Some of it is just a softening in tone. But there's a change in substance, too. She had one article where she admitted feminists sometimes use too broad a brush when calling something sexist (her example was the decrying as sexist Mark Zuckerberg's comment that he wears the same kind of casual outfit every day because following fashion trends is a waste of this time). Today, she has an article in Slate critical of a New Jersey state bill that would broaden the sexual assault definition to include when misrepresentations are made in order to get sex. I guess the author of the bill thinks retroactive removal of consent should make it count as rape. But Marcotte definitely isn't on board, and amazingly enough, this article reads like it could have been written by Cathy Young or Christina Hoff Sommers.

So, the question is why? Is she seeing career opportunities go by the wayside because she's considered too radical and now wants to pivot to the mainstream? Or is she tired of routinely getting 80% negative comments on a left-leaning publication like Slate? Perhaps she read some Cathy Young and thought 'wouldn't it be nice to just write sober, rational columns with conclusions based on evidence rather than the usual strident material with evidence based on conclusions? (Nah, probably not.) I'm guessing, though, it's just a phase. She'll have some kind of triggering event and the old Amanda will be back with us before long. I like this new Amanda, though. I hope we get at least a couple more months of her.