Bleeding from the Bunghole

[Badger3k]

Saw a thread on After the Bar Closes (hints and allegations). Mostly two people going back and forth. I made a contribution, but it's not much. I did try to put in Maryam Namazie's "report it" post. When I tried to find it, I got a 404 error. I still can get to other poster's blogs, but hers is down. I find that...interesting. I even went to "up or down" and it says it wasn't just me. I wonder if there is a reason for this?

It's up for me. Check again?

It works now. Weird. I guess it was ... dah dah day ... gremlins!

(just some internet thing screwing up somewhere, no doubt)

[Shitting Jesus]

Whoo. Sasha Pixlee, who wrote how DJ Grothe triggered all his triggers, has internalized the Good Ally dictum about taking your lumps when an Oppressed Person craps on your head.

http://i.imgur.com/lliM6dy.png

Yes ma'am, may I have another?
http://i.imgur.com/1qwNPeo.png

Yes ma'am, may I have another?
http://i.imgur.com/LcIGqS7.png

Yes ma'am, may I have another?
http://i.imgur.com/7P1Dlqb.png

You just know he's on the vinegar strokes in that profile pic.

[VAXherd]

The types of Psychology and Sociology that I've seen the slymepitters hate on most tend to comes from areas such as Theoretical Psychology, Critical Social Psychology, and general Critical Theory (or basically anything based on social constructionism). The last survey I recall suggested that 15% of professional psychologists considered themselves social constructionists. I consider 15% of professional psychologists to be fairly dim.

[…] Not to say that all that kind of work is necessarily bad, some of the papers I've read have been very interesting. However, the wilder theories and inane ramblings seem to have gained the most traction and have acquired a cult-like following.

Fair enough.

Every field has its fringe elements. Even String Theory has nothing testable so far, but someone thinks it's worth pursuing. And you never know, sometimes thinking about why a marginal theory doesn't quite work tells you more than thinking about why a better one does.

The thing that gets me riled up enough to go keyboard warrior is that most fields are judged by their best practitioners, but mine tends to be judged by its worst. No one looked at the Cold Fusion bunglers and said "Ha ha! Chemists are ALL booger heads!" But let a social scientist say something stupid in public and even Card Carrying Skeptics decide that's all they need to know.

[Steersman]

Richard Feynman on social science.

I hate to criticize Richard Feynman, but that was "I don't understand it, therefore it's wrong."

He tried working outside his field on a few occasions and didn't do very well. Looks like he should have learned more from that than he did.

He, of course, had many sensible things to say, and made many significant contributions - enough that some have called him "our patron saint" [Leon Lederman, The God Particle].

But he also made, I think, a number of highly questionable arguments, notably his "Philosophy of science is about as useful to scientists as ornithology is to birds". Presumably we aspire to being more than just "bird-brains" [sorry sacha]; knowing something about "the nature of the beast" is presumably of some value: "the proper study of man is mankind". And the processes and assumptions, hidden and otherwise, of science are presumably of some value in themselves.

[Tony Parsehole]

You just know he's on the vinegar strokes in that profile pic.

Yeah, you'll fit right in here.

[Guest]

Every field has its fringe elements. Even String Theory has nothing testable so far, but someone thinks it's worth pursuing. And you never know, sometimes thinking about why a marginal theory doesn't quite work tells you more than thinking about why a better one does.

The thing that gets me riled up enough to go keyboard warrior is that most fields are judged by their best practitioners, but mine tends to be judged by its worst. No one looked at the Cold Fusion bunglers and said "Ha ha! Chemists are ALL booger heads!" But let a social scientist say something stupid in public and even Card Carrying Skeptics decide that's all they need to know.

The difference is that physics and chemistry have delivered tangible results for society for several centuries now.

[VAXherd]

The thing that gets me riled up enough to go keyboard warrior is that most fields are judged by their best practitioners, but mine tends to be judged by its worst. No one looked at the Cold Fusion bunglers and said "Ha ha! Chemists are ALL booger heads!" But let a social scientist say something stupid in public and even Card Carrying Skeptics decide that's all they need to know.

The difference is that physics and chemistry have delivered tangible results for society for several centuries now.

[hostile] No, the difference is that social sciences speak to things people think they already understand, and frequently say things they don't want to hear. It's like everyone's a biblical literalist and we're studying fossils. [/hostile]

[VAXherd]

I hate to criticize Richard Feynman, but that was "I don't understand it, therefore it's wrong."

He, of course, had many sensible things to say, and made many significant contributions - enough that some have called him "our patron saint" [Leon Lederman, The God Particle].

But he also made, I think, a number of highly questionable arguments, notably his "Philosophy of science is about as useful to scientists as ornithology is to birds". Presumably we aspire to being more than just "bird-brains" [sorry sacha]; knowing something about "the nature of the beast" is presumably of some value: "the proper study of man is mankind". And the processes and assumptions, hidden and otherwise, of science are presumably of some value in themselves.

Sometimes I'm not too sure about Philosophy of Science myself. But I am sure of something closely related: There is a truism that the sciences are all separate, with everyone working in their own tiny worlds, unconnected to the other tiny worlds. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

Science is a single enterprise, with an unbroken chain of overlap from every part to every other part, past and present.

[AndrewV69]

[hostile] No, the difference is that social sciences speak to things people think they already understand, and frequently say things they don't want to hear. It's like everyone's a biblical literalist and we're studying fossils. [/hostile]

Sounds like a lot of topics discussed in the Manosphere. Speaking of which here is something that seems to have upset Susan Walsh over at Hooking up Smart:

http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2013/08/1 ... the-penii/

New research reveals that highly sexualized advances from boys as young as middle school are the norm. 15 year-old boys are texting their peers for Fellate Dates

Here is one part that really got to her:

Kristy shared a story about a different kind of coercion. She had been making out with a guy at his house, not sure how far she wanted to go, when he stood up and told her, “Get down on your knees.”

At first she froze. “I was really taken aback, because I was like, no one has ever said that to me before,” she said. Then he said something like, “ ‘I think that’s fair,’ ” she recalled. When she still hesitated, he pushed her down.

“It was at that point that I was like, ‘I’ll just do it,’ ” she said. “I was like, ‘ “It will be over soon enough.’ ”

(I have noticed myself that some women will do what they are told, so I am not surprised that apparently she complied).

Anyway, after reading the article do you have any thoughts? I would be interested in what you have to say.

[VickyCaramel]

[hostile] No, the difference is that social sciences speak to things people think they already understand, and frequently say things they don't want to hear. It's like everyone's a biblical literalist and we're studying fossils. [/hostile]

Sounds like a lot of topics discussed in the Manosphere. Speaking of which here is something that seems to have upset Susan Walsh over at Hooking up Smart:

http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2013/08/1 ... the-penii/

New research reveals that highly sexualized advances from boys as young as middle school are the norm. 15 year-old boys are texting their peers for Fellate Dates

Here is one part that really got to her:

Kristy shared a story about a different kind of coercion. She had been making out with a guy at his house, not sure how far she wanted to go, when he stood up and told her, “Get down on your knees.”

At first she froze. “I was really taken aback, because I was like, no one has ever said that to me before,” she said. Then he said something like, “ ‘I think that’s fair,’ ” she recalled. When she still hesitated, he pushed her down.

“It was at that point that I was like, ‘I’ll just do it,’ ” she said. “I was like, ‘ “It will be over soon enough.’ ”

(I have noticed myself that some women will do what they are told, so I am not surprised that apparently she complied).

Anyway, after reading the article do you have any thoughts? I would be interested in what you have to say.

A different girl might have run screaming from the room.

...but a load of others would say, "I felt like i had no choice in the matter, I felt like i was just being used.... it was so exciting I almost cum".

Some of them would regret it afterwards, some of them would go looking for something even exciting and depraved. YMMV

My opinion is that this is all within the realm of normal sexuality and I know better than to try and define normal.

Maybe the soft sciences should take more interesting in this kind of thing and start educating youngsters about how to handle this and other normal everyday stuff they encounter --- such as the online bullying and blackmail hysteria going on in the UK right now.

[VickyCaramel]

btw, I am typing at work, trying not to let anyone see. Forgive my spelling and grandma errors.

[Ape+lust]

<offtopic lament>

Oh, nooo.

After an 11-year run, Worth1000 will be closing next month. Afterward, it will continue only as a static museum.

Apart from the quality of the 'shops, the best thing about Worth1000 is its spirit, preferring cheerful whimsy over the dark, edgy, or violent. For inspiration and delight, no other place comes close for me.

Bum-MER.

</offtopic lament>

[mordacious1]

btw, I am typing at work, trying not to let anyone see. Forgive my spelling and grandma errors.

Good one! Not "grammar"?

[VickyCaramel]

I plan on growing old disgracefully, I am making good progress.

[Dick Strawkins]

I've been reading various messageboards on the skeptical blogosphere regarding the likelihood that PZ's accusations against Shermer constitute libel and it's just making me more confused.
There seems to be two serious groups of people arguing the point (let's ignore the pharyngulite horde who are just true believers in whatever Big Blogger writes)

Group 1.
PZ published a de facto libel against Shermer - an accusation that Shermer is a serial rapist.
He doesn't have any mitigating factors (save the unlikely chance that the charge can be proven true.)
He will lose big.

Group 2.
PZ is in the clear because he had a sincere belief that the accuser was telling the truth, and he simply passed on the words of the actual accuser. Therefore he did not commit a libel against Shermer.

Now to me I am having a great difficulty in accepting that the arguments of group 2 will stand up in court, for the simple reason that these kind of allegations almost NEVER appear in serious news publications. Given the drama of making such accusations, they would be prime sources of publicity for print news media, tabloids, internet news sites etc.

Why aren't the news sites filled with such salacious gossip (such and such hollywood star or politician is a serial rapist, child molestor or murderer)
Sure, if police are involved and an arrest is made THEN the stories suddenly come out, but not beforehand.

This factor leaves me with the impression that the argument of group 2 does not correspond with the law as understood by journalists.

[jjbinx007]

[youtube]IIg-4iybQrQ[/youtube]

[Hunt]

I disagree with Group 2 for two reasons: first because it's the person who publishes a claim that is at fault for libel. In this case, that is PZ. Second, even if PZ does entirely believe "Jane Doe" the case rests on whether he was "reckless with the truth." Under these circumstances, the seriousness of the allegations, the possible consequences, I can't believe a court would find that he was prudent with the information given him. Also, I think it's going to quickly become evident to a court that his actions were maliciously motivated.

[jjbinx007]

[VickyCaramel]

If PZ had been there, she came running up and said "He just raped me", and he was then reporting on the story she just told him, could he get away with it being much closer to the situation because he is effectively reporting his and her experiences?

As it is, he seems to be pretty distant from the alleged incident, so IMHO he is just passing on gossip.

[Hunt]

This link made rounds here about a week ago, but some might not have seen it. It addresses libel and slander from an Internet perspective:

http://www.chillingeffects.org/defamation/faq.cgi

[Jan Steen]

She may indeed be a complete moon bat, but given a choice between dinner with her or dinner with Caine, I'd choose the one who's not licking the lining of PeeZus' duodenum.

Nicely put. But let there be no doubt that Caine would withdraw her proboscis instantly the moment the holy Peezus himself steps too far out of line. Only to replace it with a rotten porcupine.

Peezus is at the same time Dear Leader and hostage of his Horde. He has to throw lumps of red meat at that pack regularly to keep it satisfied; as soon as they grow hungry they will turn on him and feed on his bloated corpse.

Speaking of linings, I remember this joke from an episode of Columbo:

A flasher exposes himself to a jewish woman. Says the woman: "Do you call that a lining?" :rimshot:

[Jan Steen]

The print is a bit small, but you can click on the magnifying glass icon to see a larger version.

http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd24 ... 46a4f3.png

I like it. :lol:

I had a related idea for a 'shop, but am suffering from Greta Christina syndrome right now, so let me just describe it here.

A largely empty book store. In a corner, behind a small table with stacks of The Happy Atheist, sits Peezus. Nobody is paying attention to him, except for this old lady who holds a book up to him and says: "Can you sign this please? It's for my daughter." The book is Gardening for Dummies.

[bovarchist]

I disagree with Group 2 for two reasons: first because it's the person who publishes a claim that is at fault for libel. In this case, that is PZ. Second, even if PZ does entirely believe "Jane Doe" the case rests on whether he was "reckless with the truth." Under these circumstances, the seriousness of the allegations, the possible consequences, I can't believe a court would find that he was prudent with the information given him. Also, I think it's going to quickly become evident to a court that his actions were maliciously motivated.

That reminds me of something from Asimov's autobiography. He sent a letter to a newspaper calling Al Capp (of L'il Abner) a racist. The paper printed it. Capp threatened to sue Asimov unless he got the paper to print a retraction. Asimov called the paper, and they told him not to worry about it. Even if worse came to worst, it was the paper, not Asimov, who was liable, as they were the ones who chose to print it. And they wouldn't have printed it if they were concerned it was libelous.

Myers and co. don't seem to grasp that you can call people racists or sexists until the cows come home because that's just opinion about a public figure. But calling someone a rapist...that crosses a line of provable fact.

[Hunt]

Myers and co. don't seem to grasp that you can call people racists or sexists until the cows come home because that's just opinion about a public figure. But calling someone a rapist...that crosses a line of provable fact.

And the burden of proof will be on Myers to prove that Shermer is a rapist. Granted, in civil court, this means the "preponderance of evidence" favors that conclusion, IOW it is more likely that Shermer is a rapist than not. Speaking dispassionately, and definitely not meaning that I morally approve this, but with alcohol being involved, this is a long shot for Myers and his witness, unless he has some ace in the hole. At the time when he made is "wine refill" addition, I'm quite sure that was all he had, because at that point he was trying to convince Shermer in whatever way he could that he had the goods on him and bluff him out of even sending a C&D letter. If he had had more, he would have shown it then. But that was then, and now he might have gathered more evidence or convinced Jane Doe to support him in court.

Who knows what's going to happen. Personally, I think Shermer will proceed and that this is going to get really, really ugly. But then again, I thought Myers was going to retract, so I'm probably full of shit.

[JackRayner]

Wouldn't "#fucktransphobia", or something of the like work much better at not burning bridges? :think:

You'd think trans folk would realize that, being a fraction of a tiny minority, they really need mainstream support, and lashing out at everyone [or using language that makes it seem like that's exactly what they're doing] isn't conducive to their goals. It doesn't help that they've already got lots of P.R. problems, what with their constant wordsmithing and strict language doctrine enforcement...

And if it isn't trans folk themselves that started this and/or are doing it, then they should do their best to tell their "supporters" that their idea of helping is doing the exact opposite...

[jmpea81]

The print is a bit small, but you can click on the magnifying glass icon to see a larger version.

http://s225.photobucket.com/user/gumbyt ... 3.png.html

I like it. :lol:

I had a related idea for a 'shop, but am suffering from Greta Christina syndrome right now, so let me just describe it here.

A largely empty book store. In a corner, behind a small table with stacks of The Happy Atheist, sits Peezus. Nobody is paying attention to him, except for this old lady who holds a book up to him and says: "Can you sign this please? It's for my daughter." The book is Gardening for Dummies.

I thought of PZ as atheism's version of Lonely Virgil, Wrestling Superstar.

http://lonelyvirgil.net/

Lonely PZ, Atheism Superstar. Has an interesting ring to it.

[JackRayner]

Damn. I really need to get to sleep. I'm starting to sound all reasonable and shit!

Fuck that!

[Jan Steen]

The print is a bit small, but you can click on the magnifying glass icon to see a larger version.

http://s225.photobucket.com/user/gumbyt ... 3.png.html

I like it. :lol:

I had a related idea for a 'shop, but am suffering from Greta Christina syndrome right now, so let me just describe it here.

A largely empty book store. In a corner, behind a small table with stacks of The Happy Atheist, sits Peezus. Nobody is paying attention to him, except for this old lady who holds a book up to him and says: "Can you sign this please? It's for my daughter." The book is Gardening for Dummies.

I thought of PZ as atheism's version of Lonely Virgil, Wrestling Superstar.

http://lonelyvirgil.net/

Lonely PZ, Atheism Superstar. Has an interesting ring to it.

You horrible person. I am shaking with laughter right now. I need some virtual hugs.

[zenbabe]

Richard Feynman on social science.

I didn't interpret that clip as "I don't understand it, therefore it's wrong."
I interpreted it as Feynman showing a great skeptical attitude about the general kinds of conclusions he hears from an average social scientist (and probably, VAX, judging the worst, though perhaps more vocal, of the field).
But what stood out to me is how seductively easy it is to compare his complaints with the FC(n).

"They sit at a typewriter, and make up all this stuff, and become an 'expert'..."
"But I know how hard it is to know something, how careful you have to be about checking your experiments, how easy it is to make mistakes..I know what means to KNOW something."
"I have this great suspicion that they don't know...and they're intimidating people.."

I see that I'm late to the party, and apparently there's a metric mukkton of youtubes of Feynman talking, but that was the first time I've seen that guy as a human, in the flesh, so to speak, and not merely text in a book. He was one of those rare ones who is just as I imagined he would be.

[zenbabe]

Our podcasts are pretty much like that. I've tried to make a habit of having the occasional short interview with Atheists from less fortunate parts of the world. Like the United States and Western Australia.

Haha!

Tomorrow night we have teed up a recording with Rock2466. That should be fun.
I'd have him on as a regular, but the two hour time difference is a killer :D

Sadly I'm unable to appreciate this comment, since at this moment, as I type, I have no idea who Rock2466 is.
Regardless, looking forward to it

[Ape+lust]

Crommie and the Queen, getting snippy with each other about that Fuson guy.

http://i.imgur.com/VsLSE0q.png

[zenbabe]

The print is a bit small, but you can click on the magnifying glass icon to see a larger version.

http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd24 ... 46a4f3.png

I like it. :lol:

I had a related idea for a 'shop, but am suffering from Greta Christina syndrome right now, so let me just describe it here.

A largely empty book store. In a corner, behind a small table with stacks of The Happy Atheist, sits Peezus. Nobody is paying attention to him, except for this old lady who holds a book up to him and says: "Can you sign this please? It's for my daughter." The book is Gardening for Dummies.

While Mykeru's latest shops are all about the dark, creepy, terrible truths (and are fantastic),

Love the playful Gumby shop.
Love the playful Jan thought.
But god help me, both of them actually engage, minimal though it is, my sympathy for PZ!
Aww.. poor PZ! 'The happy atheist', so lonely and sad and old and horrible and gone wrong.

And it seems Jan is shaking with the trauma of laughter; let's have some virtual hugs, coffee, and cake.

[Hunt]

What it makes me think is what would Hitchens think of Myers. Ah, Hitch, why did you have to go and leave us?

[Jan Steen]

Crommie and the Queen, getting snippy with each other about that Fuson guy.

http://i.imgur.com/VsLSE0q.png

This must lead to a privilege duel at dawn.

[Jan Steen]

And it seems Jan is shaking with the trauma of laughter; let's have some virtual hugs, coffee, and cake.

Thanks, I needed that. This site is draining me emotionally.

[jmpea81]

What it makes me think is what would Hitchens think of Myers. Ah, Hitch, why did you have to go and leave us?

Well, PZ claimed that Hitchens wanted to do away with Muslims (or as they are erroneously called by parts of the SJW crowd, "brown people") by bombing them all to death, so.. It don't think it's difficult to extrapolate what he might have thought (or have said, provided he gave as much as a rats ass about PZ's opinion) about PZ in turn.

Basically, what Hitchens was proposing is genocide. Or, at least, wholesale execution of the population of the Moslem world until they are sufficiently cowed and frightened and depleted that they are unable to resist us in any way, ever again.

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007 ... frf-recap/
I think it was typical case of PZ's general reading/listening comprehension problem. Not that that excuses anything.

[jmpea81]

I thought of PZ as atheism's version of Lonely Virgil, Wrestling Superstar.

http://lonelyvirgil.net/

Lonely PZ, Atheism Superstar. Has an interesting ring to it.

You horrible person. I am shaking with laughter right now. I need some virtual hugs.

Awh.. You've earned them. Thanks for those great shoops. :3

[jmpea81]

What it makes me think is what would Hitchens think of Myers. Ah, Hitch, why did you have to go and leave us?

Well, PZ claimed that Hitchens wanted to do away with Muslims (or as they are erroneously called by parts of the SJW crowd, "brown people") by bombing them all to death, so.. It don't think it's difficult to extrapolate what he might have thought (or have said, provided he gave as much as a rats ass about PZ's opinion) about PZ in turn.

Basically, what Hitchens was proposing is genocide. Or, at least, wholesale execution of the population of the Moslem world until they are sufficiently cowed and frightened and depleted that they are unable to resist us in any way, ever again.

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007 ... frf-recap/
I think it was typical case of PZ's general reading/listening comprehension problem. Not that that excuses anything.

Most of the comments have vanished, but there is a glimpse of NoR from those merry pre-*floosh* days. The "Listen to PZ" part is making a full return these days though, just with rape allegations instead of genocide.

[Mykeru]

This was sent to him about 7 hours ago. Shermer's timeline says his last tweet was about 13 hours ago...

http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x17/ ... 3fa79f.png

Fuckdammit. My edit button is borked...

Mine has never worked. I assumed it was deliberate.

You have to enable it in the user control panel.

[Gumby]

<offtopic lament>

Oh, nooo.

After an 11-year run, Worth1000 will be closing next month. Afterward, it will continue only as a static museum.

Apart from the quality of the 'shops, the best thing about Worth1000 is its spirit, preferring cheerful whimsy over the dark, edgy, or violent. For inspiration and delight, no other place comes close for me.

Bum-MER.

</offtopic lament>

I found that place a few years back. The talent level there is off the charts; it's a shame it's closing down.

[Gumby]

The print is a bit small, but you can click on the magnifying glass icon to see a larger version.

[.url=http://s225.photobucket.com/user/gumbyt ... 3.png.html]http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd24 ... 46a4f3.png[/url]

I like it. :lol:

I had a related idea for a 'shop, but am suffering from Greta Christina syndrome right now, so let me just describe it here.

A largely empty book store. In a corner, behind a small table with stacks of The Happy Atheist, sits Peezus. Nobody is paying attention to him, except for this old lady who holds a book up to him and says: "Can you sign this please? It's for my daughter." The book is Gardening for Dummies.

hahaha.

I had somewhat the same idea for the second panel of my shop, except it involved PZ at his book signing, alone except for your Nerd of Redhead robot saying "Please make mine out to 'To Nerd of Redhead, my most rational commenter, love PZ'". To which PZ replies "Just pay Mr. Shermer and get the fuck out!" Shermer would be standing behind a cash register labeled "DAMAGES", with a big smile on his face.

I almost PM'ed you asking for permission to borrow your Nerdbot character, but I decided to just go with the empty parking lot idea. Much simpler :)

[Gumby]

Oops, thought I deleted the pic from my reply, sorry :oops:

[TedDahlberg]

Richard Feynman on social science.

I hate to criticize Richard Feynman, but that was "I don't understand it, therefore it's wrong."

He tried working outside his field on a few occasions and didn't do very well. Looks like he should have learned more from that than he did.

I don't know, he did pretty well in physics for a bongo-playing safecracker.

[ERV]

http://i.imgur.com/P5r4ZHj.jpg
-- Svan

BWAAAAAAHAHAHA!

So it was a dear, life-long friend of PZ, who he TOTALLY TRUSTS... who needed to be 'reintroduced' via Carrie. **WINK!!!**

Carry Poppy is a gossipy, melodramatic, vindictive woman, aka, a massive stereotypical bitch.

Way to plow the way for female atheists and skeptics, bitch!

[Hunt]

You know, for a person who supposedly doesn't like cats, PZ looks an awful lot like a Persian.

[Hemisphere]

Fair enough.

Every field has its fringe elements. Even String Theory has nothing testable so far, but someone thinks it's worth pursuing. And you never know, sometimes thinking about why a marginal theory doesn't quite work tells you more than thinking about why a better one does.

The thing that gets me riled up enough to go keyboard warrior is that most fields are judged by their best practitioners, but mine tends to be judged by its worst. No one looked at the Cold Fusion bunglers and said "Ha ha! Chemists are ALL booger heads!" But let a social scientist say something stupid in public and even Card Carrying Skeptics decide that's all they need to know.

I know how you feel. It's probably because many people feel that they have strong intuitive answers to the problems that social scientists deal with, and it's easier to mock when a social scientist says something silly (hard to mock a crazy physicist if you have absolutely no clue what they're on about). Most people interact with other humans on a daily basis, whereas they probably never touch a chem lab outside of highschool, this probably adds to the feeling of being an 'expert' or at least having an informed opinion on social science. If we've learned anything from research on risk and judgement it's that peoples' intuitions are pretty shoddy.

[Hemisphere]

Fair enough.

Every field has its fringe elements. Even String Theory has nothing testable so far, but someone thinks it's worth pursuing. And you never know, sometimes thinking about why a marginal theory doesn't quite work tells you more than thinking about why a better one does.

The thing that gets me riled up enough to go keyboard warrior is that most fields are judged by their best practitioners, but mine tends to be judged by its worst. No one looked at the Cold Fusion bunglers and said "Ha ha! Chemists are ALL booger heads!" But let a social scientist say something stupid in public and even Card Carrying Skeptics decide that's all they need to know.

I know how you feel. It's probably because many people feel that they have strong intuitive answers to the problems that social scientists deal with, and it's easier to mock when a social scientist says something silly (hard to mock a crazy physicist if you have absolutely no clue what they're on about). Most people interact with other humans on a daily basis, whereas they probably never touch a chem lab outside of highschool, this probably adds to the feeling of being an 'expert' or at least having an informed opinion on social science. If we've learned anything from research on risk and judgement it's that peoples' intuitions are pretty shoddy.

[katamari Damassi]

New research reveals that highly sexualized advances from boys as young as middle school are the norm. 15 year-old boys are texting their peers for Fellate Dates

I always take these reports with a grain of salt. Every couple of years there's a new panic about some fad the kids are doing, and they inevitably turn out not to be true. Remember "rainbow parties", where a bunch of girls wear different colored lipstick and blow a kid until his dick looks like a rainbow? Or remember girls inserting vodka soaked tampons to get buzzed?*

*Fun Fact: Rebecca Watson's tampons aren't vodka soaked until she removes them.

[Tribble]

Any speculation on why Peezus is in such a good mood?

I'm guessing completely. Fronting, I think.

Probably to himself, though, as well as to others.

What level of bad-faith do you suppose he typically operates at, anyway? He tells himself that he's only working to help others, that he's a good and just person, and that he's glad, glad I tell you, that he has made such a strong move for justice.

He's a squalid little muckraker, you know. He can't actually believe that he is, except possibly for brief, fleeting moments.

Never, ever underestimate the ability of an ideologue to believe his own bullshit and get so caught up in it that he sincerely believes it. I've seen with SJWs even in the ultra-liberal Unitarian Universalist Church fall prey to the same disease that's turned FTB into a shit-hole (though to a far lesser extent). I saw it a lot on the Christian Music scene (especially with the most politically conservative who give the self-entitled assholes at FTB a major run in the tin-eared, self-absorbed-victim Olympics). I've seen it with the Environmentalists and their blocking of ecosystem restoration because they like it the way it is (Malibu Lagoon for example).

[Hemisphere]

New research reveals that highly sexualized advances from boys as young as middle school are the norm. 15 year-old boys are texting their peers for Fellate Dates

I always take these reports with a grain of salt. Every couple of years there's a new panic about some fad the kids are doing, and they inevitably turn out not to be true. Remember "rainbow parties", where a bunch of girls wear different colored lipstick and blow a kid until his dick looks like a rainbow? Or remember girls inserting vodka soaked tampons to get buzzed?*

*Fun Fact: Rebecca Watson's tampons aren't vodka soaked until she removes them.

I think this one might be true, at least in the UK. There was a documentary (Either BBC or Channel 4) a year or so ago that followed up on this kind of research and found that children were indeed sexting and sending naked pictures to their peers at far younger ages (like 10-13).

[Tribble]

Saw a thread on After the Bar Closes (hints and allegations). Mostly two people going back and forth. I made a contribution, but it's not much. I did try to put in Maryam Namazie's "report it" post. When I tried to find it, I got a 404 error. I still can get to other poster's blogs, but hers is down. I find that...interesting. I even went to "up or down" and it says it wasn't just me. I wonder if there is a reason for this?

It's still up. And her last post, a 'call to action' to show support for 'ex-Muslims' now has exactly ONE comment.

1 Martyn August 15, 2013 at 11:00 pm (UTC 1)

Reply

Thanks for the automated email regarding this Maryam. Signed the open letter. Hope all works out for Nahla.

Now how many on the completely unsubstantiated rape accusation thread? 4,000+ wasn't it?

Do something -- One post.
Play political muckracking and purity politics games -- 4,000 posts.

Hell, Zinnia Jones got more comments (15) on the difficulties of dealing with his penis as he goes through the trans process to 'she.'

[Tribble]

The types of Psychology and Sociology that I've seen the slymepitters hate on most tend to comes from areas such as Theoretical Psychology, Critical Social Psychology, and general Critical Theory (or basically anything based on social constructionism). The last survey I recall suggested that 15% of professional psychologists considered themselves social constructionists. I consider 15% of professional psychologists to be fairly dim.

[…] Not to say that all that kind of work is necessarily bad, some of the papers I've read have been very interesting. However, the wilder theories and inane ramblings seem to have gained the most traction and have acquired a cult-like following.

Fair enough.

Every field has its fringe elements. Even String Theory has nothing testable so far, but someone thinks it's worth pursuing. And you never know, sometimes thinking about why a marginal theory doesn't quite work tells you more than thinking about why a better one does.

The thing that gets me riled up enough to go keyboard warrior is that most fields are judged by their best practitioners, but mine tends to be judged by its worst. No one looked at the Cold Fusion bunglers and said "Ha ha! Chemists are ALL booger heads!" But let a social scientist say something stupid in public and even Card Carrying Skeptics decide that's all they need to know.

That's because the bullshit artists are self-promoters seeking the limelight, so they get it. And since so much of what they do can't be tested right away, they can hog the limelight for years, write their silly books, etc. The real social scientists are doing real work and pretty much just publish and repeat the academic/research cycle.

[Tribble]

You just know he's on the vinegar strokes in that profile pic.

Yeah, you'll fit right in here.

I'm still staying away from your "Alaskan Pipeline" reference.

[Gumby]

While Mykeru's latest shops are all about the dark, creepy, terrible truths (and are fantastic),

Love the playful Gumby shop.
Love the playful Jan thought.
But god help me, both of them actually engage, minimal though it is, my sympathy for PZ!
Aww.. poor PZ! 'The happy atheist', so lonely and sad and old and horrible and gone wrong.

I've been pretty successful at getting through life without wishing truly bad things on people. But I have absolutely zero sympathy for Myers, and hope he gets the misery he so richly deserves.

I'm sick of him and his insufferably smug self-elected position as judgment-casting "moral guardian" of the community. I'm sick of the fact that for years now, he has been pointing his pudgy finger at people who don't kowtow to him and smearing them as Lepines, misogynists, dudebros, and rapists. And I'm sick of this rabid collection of unskeptical, unthinking and hysterical sycophants he calls his "Horde", those cultish bottom-feeders he sends fanning out across the internet to do his bidding by disrupting the whole community and spreading his libels, with no regard for the feelings, rights or reputations of others.

Myers doesn't deserve the least bit of sympathy. Like all self-appointed religious moral guardians, he shows himself to be vastly more immoral than the "sinners" he condemns. He deserves to end up a bitter and broken old man shitting himself in his wheechair in some neglected state-run nursing home, looking back on his life and realizing in horror that it could have all gone so differently if he hadn't royally fucked it all up by being a weapons-grade unethical and unscrupulous shitstain.

Fuck PZ Myers, and fuck his ignorant, limp-dicked "horde". I hope Shermer and his lawyers. accomplish the civil litigation equivalent of ramming a broken bottle up PZ's ass, because this shit needs to stop. Now. Otherwise it just gets worse and worse.

[Kevin Solway]

I recommend this video, "Nail him to the wall": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rE9VfmsjVz8

[Gumby]

I recommend this video, "Nail him to the wall": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rE9VfmsjVz8

:clap: :clap: :clap:

I'm Gumby dammit, and I approve this message.

(Although I am sick of the "vidding while driving" schtick).

[Tribble]

I've been reading various messageboards on the skeptical blogosphere regarding the likelihood that PZ's accusations against Shermer constitute libel and it's just making me more confused.
There seems to be two serious groups of people arguing the point (let's ignore the pharyngulite horde who are just true believers in whatever Big Blogger writes)

Group 1.
PZ published a de facto libel against Shermer - an accusation that Shermer is a serial rapist.
He doesn't have any mitigating factors (save the unlikely chance that the charge can be proven true.)
He will lose big.

Group 2.
PZ is in the clear because he had a sincere belief that the accuser was telling the truth, and he simply passed on the words of the actual accuser. Therefore he did not commit a libel against Shermer.

Now to me I am having a great difficulty in accepting that the arguments of group 2 will stand up in court, for the simple reason that these kind of allegations almost NEVER appear in serious news publications. Given the drama of making such accusations, they would be prime sources of publicity for print news media, tabloids, internet news sites etc.

Why aren't the news sites filled with such salacious gossip (such and such hollywood star or politician is a serial rapist, child molestor or murderer)
Sure, if police are involved and an arrest is made THEN the stories suddenly come out, but not beforehand.

This factor leaves me with the impression that the argument of group 2 does not correspond with the law as understood by journalists.

This won't be the trial order as Shermer is plaintiff and controls some aspects while Myers, as defendant, controls others.

1. Accusations of rape are per se defamation. That is, Shermer, barring Myers has actual, credible proof of Shermer raping a woman, has lost the per se phase of defamation. Failing proof of rape, we go to Stage 2:

2. Myers puts on a 'public person' defense. That is, Shermer is a Public Person or Limited Public Person and must prove malice OR reckless disregard to its truth. Shermer will have to go with reckless disregard unless Myers left a smoking gun of malice in his back-channel. Also, Myers does have a history of being a malicious turd, but I don't how much that will play into the actual malice standard.

3, Damages. Those will have to be demonstrated and can include punative as well as actual damages.

4. Complications. Myers will use inapplicable or novel defense stratagies such as Innocent Dissemination. Juries can get confused and loud-mouthed, biased jurors can sway the vote to either direction.

5. Collections. It can take time. Twana Bradley, the lying girl who claimed she was raped by Steven Pagones has finally been found and her wages garnished. Bradley made these charges in 1987. Pagones got his first garnishment check of $627 in early August or so.

[Matt Cavanaugh]

Any speculation on why Peezus is in such a good mood?

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/bipola ... er/DS00356

[rpguest]

I'm seeing a private Twitter account.

This here http://www.prx.org/users/67167-rogi

And this http://rogiriverstone.com/

And this http://rriverstone.blogspot.co.uk/

So, on that (very) quick skim, there is a 'rogi riverstone'

Who appears to be nuts and the worst Website designer in the world.

No, no, they aren't. Yvette is.

My proof:

http://web.archive.org/web/201110061700 ... ormal.com/ (be glad the wayback machine doesn't include the MIDI files)

That's seizure inducing. Probably should have a trigger warning.

first valid use of that phrase

[Matt Cavanaugh]

Incidentally, what is it with all the FTB'rs and their appropriation of french? Do they think it makes them look fancy or give them gravitas if they throw in some french in their usernames?

-La Personne Rôdeuse, haisseur de couilles molles et de victimes fabriquées

I first saw it among the fems. No clue as to why.

(My french is extremely rusty, but theirs is just bad.)

-- Frayne, tete du mal