Exposing the stupidity, lies, and hypocrisy of Social Justice Warriors since July 2012
http://slymepit.com/phpbb/
The remake was a big pile of wank. Are there any remade films that are better than the original?Ape+lust wrote:
Love Bedazzled. Hate the remake. I wish they'd quit doing that.
Cards Against Humanity reference?Mykeru wrote:I think we have a winner.Southern wrote:
Physics has a fine-tuning problem that it cannot resolve, therefore Two midgets shitting inside a bucket.
Lord of the Rings. (I love Bakshi, but yeah.)Tony Parsehole wrote:The remake was a big pile of wank. Are there any remade films that are better than the original?Ape+lust wrote:
Love Bedazzled. Hate the remake. I wish they'd quit doing that.
I am NEVER referring to the movie version. Wilfred Brimley as Smith? Bah. Pale Piece of Pig's Ear indeed. I did like the casting for MacCleary, that was kind of inspired. And Joel Grey did try really hard with Chiun. But I think they only looked at the first two books, and not the rest, so they missed that the entire thing is kind of farcical.Badger3k wrote:Yeah...even if he isn't Korean. (I am pretty sure you are not referring to the movie version)welch wrote:Shiva. Because Remo WIlliams is AWESOME.VickyCaramel wrote: It hasn't progressed beyond, "It is a problem therefore...?"
He seems reluctant to say "goddidit" and it looks like he wants to keep pointing to the problem till we all reach the conclusion that goddidit. Thats what it looks like.
Why don't we all skip to the next step and just discuss which god we want it to be? I'd like a religion with plenty of booze and orgies, but without tithing and human sacrifice.
The Thing. And... The Thing. That's all I've got, though there are probably others.Tony Parsehole wrote:The remake was a big pile of wank. Are there any remade films that are better than the original?Ape+lust wrote:
Love Bedazzled. Hate the remake. I wish they'd quit doing that.
Aye. Of course.welch wrote:Lord of the Rings. (I love Bakshi, but yeah.)Tony Parsehole wrote:The remake was a big pile of wank. Are there any remade films that are better than the original?Ape+lust wrote:
Love Bedazzled. Hate the remake. I wish they'd quit doing that.
For those interested in dedicating off-Pit study-time to the fine-tuning debate, here is a summary of Stenger's points in his book:heddle wrote:The most you can say is I poo-pooed Victor Stenger's approach to this. We could go through his book in detail but for now I provided only the circumstantial evidence that it appears only Victor Stenger and non-scientists (or perhaps out-of-field) scientists who read his book think that he has succeeded. The book was not peer-reviewed--nor is it a popularized companion to peer-reviewed research. Cosmologists continue to treat the fine tuning as a problem and make no reference in the professional literature to the problem having been solved by Stenger.
Gotta disagree there Barnowl. I loved the film (even though it deviated a lot from the book) and fucking loathed the TV series. Ian Mcneice was half decent but everything else, particularly the sets and costumes was a disgrace. I'll never forgive them for what they did to the Sardaukar:BarnOwl wrote:The TV miniseries Frank Herbert's Dune was better than the David Lynch film, which I thought of as Blue Velvet Dune.
Fuck Lynch into the ground with a rusty pineapple (except Elephant Man, maybe).BarnOwl wrote:The TV miniseries Frank Herbert's Dune was better than the David Lynch film, which I thought of as Blue Velvet Dune.
You've got me thinking for good prequels now....Ape+lust wrote:The Thing. And... The Thing. That's all I've got, though there are probably others.Tony Parsehole wrote:The remake was a big pile of wank. Are there any remade films that are better than the original?Ape+lust wrote:
Love Bedazzled. Hate the remake. I wish they'd quit doing that.
Wait, here's another -- Reservoir Dogs is better than City on Fire.
Worse than remakes are prequels. I can't think of one that works, unless you count The Godfather II, which is half a prequel. I was hoping Prometheus would break the curse, but nope, it sucked harder than I feared it would.
Yeah those costumes are pretty silly. And I did like Patrick Stewart as Gurney Halleck. But most of the film was too David Lynch-y, and the only Lynch film I halfway cared for was The Elephant Man. Got really tired of the contrived antics in Twin Peaks as well.Tony Parsehole wrote:Gotta disagree there Barnowl. I loved the film (even though it deviated a lot from the book) and fucking loathed the TV series. Ian Mcneice was half decent but everything else, particularly the sets and costumes was a disgrace. I'll never forgive them for what they did to the Sardaukar:BarnOwl wrote:The TV miniseries Frank Herbert's Dune was better than the David Lynch film, which I thought of as Blue Velvet Dune.
http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb2 ... V-2000.png
Thanks for posting those links. And for the correct assessment that my views are mainstream.Apples wrote:For those interested in dedicating off-Pit study-time to the fine-tuning debate, here is a summary of Stenger's points in his book:heddle wrote:The most you can say is I poo-pooed Victor Stenger's approach to this. We could go through his book in detail but for now I provided only the circumstantial evidence that it appears only Victor Stenger and non-scientists (or perhaps out-of-field) scientists who read his book think that he has succeeded. The book was not peer-reviewed--nor is it a popularized companion to peer-reviewed research. Cosmologists continue to treat the fine tuning as a problem and make no reference in the professional literature to the problem having been solved by Stenger.
http://debunkingdenialism.com/2011/11/1 ... -argument/
Here is a reply to Stenger's case from Luke Barnes:
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/111 ... 4647v1.pdf
Here is Stenger's response:
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1202/1202.4359.pdf
Here is Barnes' two-part retort to Stenger:
http://letterstonature.wordpress.com/20 ... gent-life/
http://letterstonature.wordpress.com/20 ... er-part-2/
Bonus link - here is Barnes calling out PZ for some flippant statements about fine-tuning. PZ shows up to defend himself in the comments:
http://letterstonature.wordpress.com/20 ... p-z-myers/
****************************************************
Gotta say I'm with Tribble on this -- It's odd to see so many people implying that Heddle's insistence on its significance counts against his scientific credibility. AFAICT Heddle's statements are totally mainstream and consistent with the views of most non-theist physicists. On the other hand, I can see why people are uncomfortable with physicists talking about it in public, since it looks like powerful ammunition for IDers. On the other other hand, if you can prove that there are infinite parallel universes, problem solved. :think:
I think the fine-tuning issue is fascinating (if not very LOLzy) and would be interested in seeing it continue on its own thread.
Off topic, but I had an elderly cat (passed away earlier this year just a few weeks shy of 20 years old), that started urinating in corners and along walls in her dotage. The vet suggested using a special litter used to box train kittens, Dr. Elseys (http://www.preciouscat.com). It worked like a charm. Cat stopped inappropriate urinating immediately and never did it again.Ape+lust wrote:BarnOwl wrote:I have a cat who thinks peeing in corners is a fine thing to do. Happily, she hates Febreze (and fabric softeners). I don't blame her, I can't stand the cloying stuff either.P&G is the company responsible for Febreze, a product so heinous I can't even bring myself to discuss it. :shock:
I preferred the 70s remake of 'Invasion of the Body Snatchers'.Tony Parsehole wrote:The remake was a big pile of wank. Are there any remade films that are better than the original?Ape+lust wrote:
Love Bedazzled. Hate the remake. I wish they'd quit doing that.
I don't know whether Abrams' 2009 Star Trek counts as a prequel (it's certainly a reboot), but I thought it was pretty damn good.Tony Parsehole wrote:
You've got me thinking for good prequels now....
GAH....Twin Peaks!! That really lured me in but by the second series I knew he was taking the piss.BarnOwl wrote:
Yeah those costumes are pretty silly. And I did like Patrick Stewart as Gurney Halleck. But most of the film was too David Lynch-y, and the only Lynch film I halfway cared for was The Elephant Man. Got really tired of the contrived antics in Twin Peaks as well.
Yep. Dredd was miles better. For the record I thought it was brilliant.Dick Strawkins wrote:I preferred the 70s remake of 'Invasion of the Body Snatchers'.Tony Parsehole wrote:The remake was a big pile of wank. Are there any remade films that are better than the original?Ape+lust wrote:
Love Bedazzled. Hate the remake. I wish they'd quit doing that.
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/--U3HmxIa0RM/U ... n+trio.jpg
The recent Judge Dredd remake was also far better than the original Sylvester Stallone abomination (it still wasn't great, but a big improvement.)
Nah, Dredd was the mutts nuts IMO - my favourite SF film of recent years. Likewise, the best use of 3D I've yet seen at the flicks. Seriously, this scene in 3D was...whoa...Dick Strawkins wrote:I preferred the 70s remake of 'Invasion of the Body Snatchers'.Tony Parsehole wrote:The remake was a big pile of wank. Are there any remade films that are better than the original?Ape+lust wrote:
Love Bedazzled. Hate the remake. I wish they'd quit doing that.
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/--U3HmxIa0RM/U ... n+trio.jpg
The recent Judge Dredd remake was also far better than the original Sylvester Stallone abomination (it still wasn't great, but a big improvement.)
It might be worth $20 just for the yucks.Dick Strawkins wrote:Rebecca is promoting a kickstarter on twitter from her boyfriend and Carrie Poppy.
Apparently they are trying to make a documentary about Sedona - some Arizona town that is full of woo-merchants.
It sounds a pretty boring premise to sell and it doesn't really look like they are getting too many takers - they need 20,000 dollars pledged by the 1st of January. Currently they are at 3,300.
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/165 ... ntary-film
Trigger warning if you click the video.
It's a hipster holiday.John D wrote:It might be worth $20 just for the yucks.Dick Strawkins wrote:Rebecca is promoting a kickstarter on twitter from her boyfriend and Carrie Poppy.
Apparently they are trying to make a documentary about Sedona - some Arizona town that is full of woo-merchants.
It sounds a pretty boring premise to sell and it doesn't really look like they are getting too many takers - they need 20,000 dollars pledged by the 1st of January. Currently they are at 3,300.
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/165 ... ntary-film
Trigger warning if you click the video.
:lol:Dick Strawkins wrote:
It's a hipster holiday.
Carrie Poppy is going to the Mystic Meg of Sedona to look into her crystal ball for more dirt on Shermer.
How he did it? Simple: New Line Cinema was going down under until PJ got into the Hobbit project. They could have done with two movies, but that would be only 66% of the profits.ROBOKiTTY wrote:I have a hard time understanding how Peter Jackson turned a mediate-length novel into a movie trilogy. It just smells like profiteering to me.
The TV mini series was very enjoyable to me. I hadn't read the books and the series inspired me to do so. My boyfriend at the time had read them, and was huffing and puffing and tsking at the series, but because he was not Welsh, he didn't spoil the books for me. When I got to the parts in the books that were vastly different, then I understood his reactions. Directors can't seem to resist putting their own stamp on stories.BarnOwl wrote:The TV miniseries Frank Herbert's Dune was better than the David Lynch film, which I thought of as Blue Velvet Dune.
I haven't seen the movies nor read about the ones that are out, so guessing wildly, did Jackson bring in a lot of back story from the Sillymarillion into the Hobbit?Southern wrote:How he did it? Simple: New Line Cinema was going down under until PJ got into the Hobbit project. They could have done with two movies, but that would be only 66% of the profits.ROBOKiTTY wrote:I have a hard time understanding how Peter Jackson turned a mediate-length novel into a movie trilogy. It just smells like profiteering to me.
Going for the low hanging fruit eh? I thought SJW's looked on bigfoot skepticism with contempt.Dick Strawkins wrote:Rebecca is promoting a kickstarter on twitter from her boyfriend and Carrie Poppy.
Apparently they are trying to make a documentary about Sedona - some Arizona town that is full of woo-merchants.
It sounds a pretty boring premise to sell and it doesn't really look like they are getting too many takers - they need 20,000 dollars pledged by the 1st of January. Currently they are at 3,300.
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/165 ... ntary-film
Trigger warning if you click the video.
The lovely Derren Brown went there once and debunked a number of so-called psychics. He his open about deceiving anyone, including the audience, yet as far as I understood he uses the techniques he outlines at the beginning (showmanship, psychology etc.) and not staging (working with stooges, hired actors etc). You can never know though, which is kind of the point. It could be that suggestions we hear in the first skit “don't go overboard on details†“let the images sail through your mind†(boat) actually do work, or if he fools around with the audience and has some other trick up his sleeve. Anyway, I enjoy watching his stuff all things considered.Dick Strawkins wrote:Rebecca is promoting a kickstarter on twitter from her boyfriend and Carrie Poppy.
Apparently they are trying to make a documentary about Sedona - some Arizona town that is full of woo-merchants.
It sounds a pretty boring premise to sell and it doesn't really look like they are getting too many takers - they need 20,000 dollars pledged by the 1st of January. Currently they are at 3,300.
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/165 ... ntary-film
Trigger warning if you click the video.
If the likes of Shermer, Grothe and Radford do it, it's despicable.Ericb wrote:Going for the low hanging fruit eh? I thought SJW's looked on bigfoot skepticism with contempt.Dick Strawkins wrote:Rebecca is promoting a kickstarter on twitter from her boyfriend and Carrie Poppy.
Apparently they are trying to make a documentary about Sedona - some Arizona town that is full of woo-merchants.
It sounds a pretty boring premise to sell and it doesn't really look like they are getting too many takers - they need 20,000 dollars pledged by the 1st of January. Currently they are at 3,300.
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/165 ... ntary-film
Trigger warning if you click the video.
I wrote something on google plus about this.Karmakin wrote:This is what those people simply don't understand. Why can't these people understand that there are a LOT of people out there who are VERY sensitive to the concept of being attacked either socially or systematically and react strongly in opposition to any sign of this? They should try having a little fucking empathy for once.Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:I've had enough with this passive-agressive bullshit "because x is y, right?". Benson and friends are getting on my nerves more than they should. I may have to take my distances from this shit for a while.Brive1987 wrote:While we have debated fine tuning OB has kept her finger on the pulse of male terrorism.
Whoever are involved are idiots. But really? Is this what the outrage rests on?
I also find it "interesting" that she used the obscure word 'jape'
Very Bart / Parsehole
The headline is also a tad leading.
BBCode (message boards & forums)
http://i.imgur.com/urd3XPI.jpg
http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... on-or-gbh/
Or maybe I could call her a fucking old, shrivelled lying twat, and just relax while having lunch and watching An idiot Abroad.
Yeah, I'll do that.
They're used to their own badness getting a pass, so they don't understand, but I think a lot of people innately understand that a form like this would be used to get people...either say if a date went bad, or if someone did something they didn't like, or even just to plain old-fashion bully them. That's how this would be used, for the most part. Real reporting of sexual assault? Of course, they'd be going to the POLICE.
Now, I don't think that this particular action was useful...it looked bad from an optics point of view, which IMO is always important. But note that nowhere in that post did Ophelia stop to actually think about WHY people are angry about this sort of thing. She just chalks it up to "misogyny" and leaves it at that.
I doubt you folks just want the whole thing cut and pasted in (or would you prefer that) so there's more at the link.I think their stated use of that form is a problem.
Community of the Wrongly Accused defends the form as one required by the Clery Act http://www.cotwa.info/2013/12/cotwa-can ... ental.html. But my layman's look at the form leads me to think it's not as simple as that.
I don't know the background of this form, how it is used at Occidental, whether forms like this are widespread at other colleges, but reading the form I see:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/vie ... c6MA#gid=0
[1] If a perpetrator is named, a member of the Dean of Students Office will meet with that person to share that the person was named in an anonymous report, review the Sexual Misconduct Policy, and [2] inform the person that if the allegations are true, the behavior needs to cease immediately. [3] Information shared in this form alone will not result in anyone going through the grievance process.
I added the numbers in the quote.
Given that rape and sexual assault are serious crimes, and in this post Dear Colleague Letter, guilty until proven innocent, preponderance of the evidence era, (reason.com/archives/2013/12/17/guilty-until-proven-innocent) I just don't see how 1, 2, and 3 above can be simultaneously true.
Especially 2.
...
‘Men’s rights activists’ conspire to cripple college rape reporting system with false reports
A group of self-described “men’s rights†activists have recently flooded an anonymous online sexual assault reporting form with false claims in an attempt to make the system unusable.
The anti-misogyny website Man Boobz noted on Tuesday that the Men’s Rights group on Reddit had posted a link to Occidental College’s “Sexual Violence Anonymous Reporting Form.â€
The Reddit post was titled: “Feminists at Occidental College created an online form to anonymously report rape/sexual assault. You just fill out a form and the person is called into the office on a rape charge. The ‘victim’ never has to prove anything or reveal their identity.â€
As several Redditors observed, the title of the post was misleading because the form clearly says that the data is intended to “identify and address troubling trends,†and that “nformation shared in this form alone will not result in anyone going through the grievance process.â€
“If a perpetrator is named, a member of the Dean of Students Office will meet with that person to share that the person was named in an anonymous report, review the Sexual Misconduct Policy, and inform the person that if the allegations are true, the behavior needs to cease immediately,†the document explains.
But many members of the Men’s Rights subreddit boasted that they had filled out false reports.
...
This form should be used by members of the Occidental College community who have experienced or have been witness to sexual violence (sexual assault, rape or sexual battery). The information will be used to identify and address troubling trends. ... Information shared in this form alone will not result in anyone going through the grievance process.
That language included the bogus rape accusations "I was assaulted by Occidental College, I was assaulted by feminists, I was assaulted by Fatty McFatfat," Tranquada confirmed.
The liberal arts college was flooded with 400 assault reports in 36 hours, according to an email to students and staff from Lauren Carella, the interim Title IX coordinator. The reports were the "result of an effort by off-campus Internet 'trolls,'" Carella wrote.
"Some of the reports we received, which named such respondents as 'Occidental College,' 'feminists' and 'Fatty McFatFat,' were clearly not made in good faith," Carella wrote. Some faculty, staff and student names also were listed as respondents on the reports, she said. "This abuse of our reporting system is unacceptable to all of us," Carella said. "This form is an important option for the Oxy community to use to address the serious issue of sexual assault."
Mayr was talking about animal behavior being goal-driven. Kauffman is saying molecules strive toward goals. To impart purpose or striving to evolution is non-darwinian, and inescapably summons A Higher Purpose™ and all that entails. Mayr was a group-selectionist (thus anti-hamiltonian, thus wrong), but his excellent work on speciation was firmly rooted in darwinian natural selection. Kauffman, otoh, is a leading proponent of non-darwinian forms of evolution.Steersman wrote:Looks pretty innocuous to me – all of life quite clearly seems to be based on increasing order – for awhile in any case – and the pursuit of goals in notable contradistinction to non-life. As mentioned, all within some quite credible physics – or are you going to dispute that?Stuart Kauffman wrote: " Life is different from non-life because it generates selves with teleodynamic constraints, molecular arrangements that are for something, have a purpose, point to goals that, if achieved, allow the self to make the crucial natural-selection cut."
In addition, many others have said pretty much the same thing, Ernst Mayr for example in his Toward a New Philosophy of Biology said:I hardly see Kauffman’s statement being inconsistent with or out-of-line relative to those statements of Mayr’s, and many others of his as well.Mayr wrote:Intentional, purposeful human behaviour is, almost by definition, teleological. Yet I shall exclude it from further discussion because use of the words intentional or consciously premeditated, which are usually employed in connection with such behavior, runs the risk of getting us involved in complex controversies over psychological theory, even though much of human behaviour does not differ from animal behavior. [pg 41]
Goal-directed behavior (in the widest sense of this word) is extremely widespread in the organic world; for instance, most activity connected with migration, food-getting, courtship, ontogeny, and all phases of reproduction are characterized by such goal orientation. The occurrence of goal-directed processes is perhaps the most characteristic feature of the world of living organisms. [p45]
Also here - this looks like a permanent home.ROBOKiTTY wrote:C+= moved again:
https://code.google.com/p/c-plus-equality/
Stupid Bitbucket. I thought they had principles, but they turned out to be misogynists just liek GitHub.
[youtube]YP9kLSEfHTM[/youtube]Lsuoma wrote:Also here - this looks like a permanent home.ROBOKiTTY wrote:C+= moved again:
https://code.google.com/p/c-plus-equality/
Stupid Bitbucket. I thought they had principles, but they turned out to be misogynists just liek GitHub.
Plus, her virgin neckbeard suitors might wonder, 'if an attractive, fit man like Reginald can't get pussy from Becca, what chance does a fat, larpy dude with cheetoh-stains on his fingers like me have?' And then they start to reconsider buying Becca all that expensive shit on her Amazon wishlist.Ape+lust wrote: Her Mormon Date video was posted to over a dozen subreddits, half of them MRA forums. Some ... some had a take she'd never want to hear: Rebecca Watson is a bigot and humiliator. That's different than the usual cunt-skank-ho-lulz shit she's always too happy to share. If that makes her uncomfortable, too fecking bad, she earned it.
Yes. he also expands on the battle of the 5 armies, given that in the hobbit, it was basically "Bilbo gets hit by a rock. WHen he wakes up, it's all over but the crying over Thorin"zenbabe wrote:I haven't seen the movies nor read about the ones that are out, so guessing wildly, did Jackson bring in a lot of back story from the Sillymarillion into the Hobbit?Southern wrote:How he did it? Simple: New Line Cinema was going down under until PJ got into the Hobbit project. They could have done with two movies, but that would be only 66% of the profits.ROBOKiTTY wrote:I have a hard time understanding how Peter Jackson turned a mediate-length novel into a movie trilogy. It just smells like profiteering to me.
GODDAMMIT WELSH YOU FUCKER I HAVEN'T READ THE BOOK YET!welch wrote:Yes. he also expands on the battle of the 5 armies, given that in the hobbit, it was basically "Bilbo gets hit by a rock. WHen he wakes up, it's all over but the crying over Thorin"zenbabe wrote:
I haven't seen the movies nor read about the ones that are out, so guessing wildly, did Jackson bring in a lot of back story from the Sillymarillion into the Hobbit?
Chill, Winston, that's not what really happens anyway. Bilbo actually gets hit by a coconut.zenbabe wrote:GODDAMMIT WELSH YOU FUCKER I HAVEN'T READ THE BOOK YET!welch wrote:Yes. he also expands on the battle of the 5 armies, given that in the hobbit, it was basically "Bilbo gets hit by a rock. WHen he wakes up, it's all over but the crying over Thorin"zenbabe wrote:
I haven't seen the movies nor read about the ones that are out, so guessing wildly, did Jackson bring in a lot of back story from the Sillymarillion into the Hobbit?
Depends how much water is in the vicinity. If it's damp the Dune worm is fucked.Kareem wrote:Because now I gotta ask:
If a Chtorran worm,
http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/1829h6w ... xlarge.jpg
got in a fight with a Shai-hulud,
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/e ... ndworm.JPG
Who would win?
Girl Writes What had a comment that summarizes:Matt Cavanaugh wrote:Plus, her virgin neckbeard suitors might wonder, 'if an attractive, fit man like Reginald can't get pussy from Becca, what chance does a fat, larpy dude with cheetoh-stains on his fingers like me have?' And then they start to reconsider buying Becca all that expensive shit on her Amazon wishlist.Ape+lust wrote: Her Mormon Date video was posted to over a dozen subreddits, half of them MRA forums. Some ... some had a take she'd never want to hear: Rebecca Watson is a bigot and humiliator. That's different than the usual cunt-skank-ho-lulz shit she's always too happy to share. If that makes her uncomfortable, too fecking bad, she earned it.
A man was shamed for caring about his reproductive rights.
By a feminist who has publicly stated that sex with a drunk person is rape because a drunk person cannot consent to sex, but who was about to have sex after drinking (and her comment that she ordered "one of everything" strongly hints that she was drinking to excess, which she has a history of doing).
The man was sober, and I'm sure she'd argue that a sober person having sex with a drunk person is very definitely rape, with the sober person entirely culpable.
Sex is supposed to be a mutually agreed upon act, yet she was pressuring him to have sex under circumstances that he was uncomfortable with. According to many feminists (and college sexual misconduct handbooks), pressuring someone into having sex when they don't want to, is sexual misconduct.
There is an unacknowledged (by feminists) power imbalance regarding sex and dating, that is weighted heavily in favor of the woman. A man is always supposed to accept a woman's "no", yet women feel entitled to sex from men when they want it, and often get seriously pissed over a rejection--even over something like birth control. Imagine a man telling a woman to get the fuck out of his apartment because she dared to hesitate before finally agreeing under pressure to "put out". Imagine a man getting pissed off at a woman who thought a condom alone wasn't adequate protection. Would a man get up on a stage and receive polite (if awkward) laughter and applause telling that story?
She put up so many red flags with this anecdote, it's not even funny. She's an "accidentally on purpose" pregnancy, or false rape accusation, just waiting to happen. Men need to be educated on these types of red flags.
They think that's bad? The only employer willing to hire otherkins is Disneyland!
Wow these guys are taking this joke all the way.Dick Strawkins wrote:[youtube]YP9kLSEfHTM[/youtube]Lsuoma wrote:Also here - this looks like a permanent home.ROBOKiTTY wrote:C+= moved again:
https://code.google.com/p/c-plus-equality/
Stupid Bitbucket. I thought they had principles, but they turned out to be misogynists just liek GitHub.
Code: Select all
//compile with: g++ -std=c++11 fizzbuzz.cpp -o fizzbuzz
//Here we see the ego of X being raised (by continued liking) until it feels
// itself more attractive than 101, at which point it loses all respect and
// honor for 101. This typical example of femminine social dynamics should
// go towards setting the standard for C+= programs.
#define FIZZBUZZ_CPP
#include "fixCPP.Xe"
xi main (xi requestCount, strong** requests) {
attempt {
xi x;
pretend_is(x,0);
while (honors(x, 101)) {
maybe (envelops(x,3) && please) {
plz::raise_awareness of_the_following "FIZZ\n";
} perhaps_and_equally_valid maybe (envelops(x,5) && please) {
plz::raise_awareness of_the_following "BUZZ\n";
} perhaps_and_equally_valid {
plz::raise_awareness of_the_following x also "\n";
}
like(x);
}
} on_alternative_success (trigger oppression) {
plz::raise_awareness of_the_following "ERROR: " also oppression.why();
}
}*snigger* Spot-on.welch wrote:
Yes. he also expands on the battle of the 5 armies, given that in the hobbit, it was basically "Bilbo gets hit by a rock. WHen he wakes up, it's all over but the crying over Thorin"
There is nothing in that repo other than speech and pretty innocuous speech at that.Pagancat wrote: Wow these guys are taking this joke all the way.
Code: Select all
//compile with: g++ -std=c++11 fizzbuzz.cpp -o fizzbuzz //Here we see the ego of X being raised (by continued liking) until it feels // itself more attractive than 101, at which point it loses all respect and // honor for 101. This typical example of femminine social dynamics should // go towards setting the standard for C+= programs. #define FIZZBUZZ_CPP #include "fixCPP.Xe" xi main (xi requestCount, strong** requests) { attempt { xi x; pretend_is(x,0); while (honors(x, 101)) { maybe (envelops(x,3) && please) { plz::raise_awareness of_the_following "FIZZ\n"; } perhaps_and_equally_valid maybe (envelops(x,5) && please) { plz::raise_awareness of_the_following "BUZZ\n"; } perhaps_and_equally_valid { plz::raise_awareness of_the_following x also "\n"; } like(x); } } on_alternative_success (trigger oppression) { plz::raise_awareness of_the_following "ERROR: " also oppression.why(); } }
Jeeeeesus fucking Christ, it's earnest sorts like this that keep three card monte dealers in business and people who claim to be able to move objects by telekenisis, when they are simply fucking blowing on it, with an endless series of deep thinker scientists to bamboozle. This is, to go further, why I'm convinced that all the "intellectuals on the internet", scientists and self-appointed doofus skeptics will not only never win against people with communications and marketing degrees, Creationists, Apologists, con artists and general purveyors of horseshit, but they will get trounced.Apples wrote:Gotta say I'm with Tribble on this -- It's odd to see so many people implying that Heddle's insistence on its significance counts against his scientific credibility. AFAICT Heddle's statements are totally mainstream and consistent with the views of most non-theist physicists. On the other hand, I can see why people are uncomfortable with physicists talking about it in public, since it looks like powerful ammunition for IDers. On the other other hand, if you can prove that there are infinite parallel universes, problem solved. :think: