The Refuge of the Toads

[Lsuoma]

Something for the history file - here is David Brin (author of 'The Postman' and that piece justifying the Empires destruction of the terrorist base on Alderaan) - talking about addiction and self-righteous indignation (way back in 2005)


http://www.davidbrin.com/addiction.html

http://img.ifcdn.com/images/412c5ce7ffa ... bfba_1.jpg

[Skep tickle]

http://www.everythingenglishblog.com/?p=541

The actual rule governing the use of “a” versus “an” is related to the sound made by the first letter in the following word. More specifically, if the first letter of the following word makes a consonant sound, you should use “a;” in contrast, if the first letter of the following word is silent and/or makes a vowel sound, you should use “an.” This rule clearly still works for our previous examples, i.e., “a book” and “an elephant.” In addition, it also helps to clarify more difficult situations.
For example, let’s consider the word “hour.” It starts with an “h,” which is a consonant. However, the “h” in “hour” is silent; therefore, the first sound from this word is a vowel sound. Hence, a grammatically correct sentence would refer to “an hour,” not “a hour.” Yet, in other “h” words, the “h” or consonant sound is made, thereby requiring the use of “a.” Examples include “a history book” and “a hotdog.”
Also consider words starting with “u.” Some such words make a “y” or consonant sound (e.g., unicorn, unique, and ukulele); in such instances, you should use the article “a” (e.g., a unicorn, a unique store, and a ukulele). Others make a “u” vowel sound (e.g., umbrella, ugly, and uprising); in such instances, you should use the article “an” (e.g., an umbrella, an ugly dog, and an uprising).
Therefore, when you question whether you should use “a” or “an” in your writing endeavors, look at the word immediately following the article. Better yet, say the word aloud. If this word starts with a consonant sound, use “a.” If it starts with a vowel sound, use “an.”

The phenomenon of inserting a consonant (in this case "n") between two vowels (the "a" and the subsequent vowel sound) is called excrescence, and it's a variation of the epenthesis, the insertion of a sound in a word.

You may think of "a" and the following word as two different words, and this is true semantically (i.e. their meaning is separate) but not phonetically (i.e. they're pronounced as a single word). Inserting the "n" between "a" and a vowel sound is useful to avoid hiatus,the presence of two vowel sounds in two consecutive syllables.

The "silent" h is a grapheme (i.e. a written letter) with no phonetic content (i.e. no sound). The "n" is inserted to avoid the hiatus between the "a" and the vowel(s) after the "silent" h.

In the case "u" we have two different sounds represented by the same letter. The "consonant" sound is /ju/ (as in university, pronounced /ˌjuːnɪˈv3ːsɪtɪ/) while the vowel is /ʌ/ (as in ugly, pronounced /ˈʌglɪ/.

[/ʌ/ is an open-mid back unrounded vowel, which means that it's prounced with the tip tongue in the middle of the palate (open-mid) with the tongue positioned as far back as possible without turning it into a consonant sound (back) and with flat, not rounded lips (unrounded).]

Now you know. And knowing is half the battle. GI Joe!

^Love learning stuff like this - thanks! Bonus, 2 new* words and a new* meaning for "hiatus"...which itself contains a hiatus. :)

*meaning new to me of course

[Dave]

FFS, "It’s the belief that women are people" are they still pushing this bullcrap. It must be true because all the books written before anybody had even heard of feminism used to have 'people AND women' in them. :roll:

<snip>

It is the case that 'people' used to be used to mean 'men', at least in some places & situations. (Probably still the case in some places in the world, but I don't have details handy.) As a* historical example, the US Constitution opens with "We the people", which could be gender-neutral, but then it goes on to say in Article I that "The House of Representatives shall be composed of members chosen every second year by the people of the several states", in which "people" means "people who can vote", which was in fact not all "people" (not women, and not all men either).

Point of order: At the time of the ratification of the Constitution, women voted regularly in NJ, as long as they owned property. They were not excluded until 1807. So, I suppose "people who can vote" did include women.

It was also the general idea at the time that the man represented his whole household, so in a sense, the people at the time did feel that women were involved in the choosing, if not in the actual voting.

Im not arguing that women directly voting at the ballot box is not better, Im just not sure your exegesis is really accurate. I would prefer a more direct example of people being used to mean men and only men.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

I've switched to the dark side: I finally bought Eurotruck Simulator 2. I've become a virtual trucker. I need a new life...

[Dave]

I've switched to the dark side: I finally bought Eurotruck Simulator 2. I've become a virtual trucker. I need a new life...

Here, play this: http://desertbus-game.org/

[Matt Cavanaugh]

Went surfing, and this blog's assessment of the T-34: it was a piece of crap:

http://chris-intel-corner.blogspot.com/ ... f-war.html

http://chris-intel-corner.blogspot.gr/2 ... oviet.html

Discuss.

T-34's were produced at the rate of 1300/month. The Germans did not make 1400 King Tigers in the whole war. It took more effort to built the turret of a King Tiger than to assemble the whole T34. The KT main engine bearings were a work of art, designed to last decades if properly maintained. All for a piece of equipment whose lifetime was measured in days on the front line. The Russians didn't bother to grind off the kerf marks on the T34 plates, it was good enough, onto the next tank. They largely curtailed production of their large tank because they got bogged down in the muck and were too large for most bridges built by peasants a hundred years ago which is about all you had in the vast eastern front. And by the end of the war tanks had the hell kicked out of them by aircraft, especially the ones the carried rockets like the Yak7 on the eastern front and the Typhoon on the western front. They could take out an entire column of tanks if the tanks were caught on a straight stretch of road.

My father fought in WWII. He said Hitler was the best ally the West had and German (over) engineering were the second best allies we had.
That being said, he thought the 88 cannon was the best piece of equipment made in the war.

* You're comparing a medium tank to a heavy, then criticizing the latter for not having medium tank attributes. in any case, the King Tiger PzKpfw VIB was built because Hitler had a small penis. The PzKpfw VI Tiger was fine as an heavy tank;

* The Soviets abandoned the heavy KV tank as it was underpowered & because of changes in doctrine. When later developed as the IS, it was useful;

* Tanks had always been vulnerable to ground-attack aircraft. Rüdel describes taking out 13 T-34s in a row with his 37mm armed Stuka;

* The USSR & US had far greater industrial capacity than Germany; the designs of their respective tanks did not significantly affect the numbers produced. Each nation was using roughly the same amount of capacity & manpower to produce roughly same-sized tanks:

Pz IV: 24t
T-34: 26.5t
Matilda II: 27t
Cromwell: 28t
Sherman: 30t
Char-B: 32t

What the T-34 links above reveal, beyond the design flaws, is the unsurprising shoddy workmanship in Soviet factories;


* This "over-engineered" meme sounds like PZ Myers' "hyper-skepticism"; a fig leaf to hide the fact that Allied tanks were terribly 'under-engineered'.

[Matt Cavanaugh]

I'm not that bothered about the Ghostbusters reboot, it's The Blues Sisters that has me worried.

Shaddup! Don't give anyone bad ideas!

Rachel Dolezal as Jake, for sure.

[Service Dog]

You dipshits are the reason Heinlein had a stroke.

Regurgitating the same-old rocket trajectories. Hanging your Lisa Simpson self-image on affiliating yerself with 'hard science fiction'.

Ghostbusters is harder than hard. It's gonzo. Psychedelic pharmaceutical fieldwork.

The truth is out there: Trump is Slymer. If you wanna quibble... don't bicker over the science part... ask whether Ghostbusters is Fiction. What more proof of necromancy do you need... than the new Ghostbusters trailer itself!

But that's not the point! Bats! Swine! Make a note of it. Nevermind.

Altered States Where the Buffalo Roam. Dr. John Lilly. hurumblegrum. Swindlers! Nature's heirloom hierarchy. And so on.
[.youtube]25gSLDx_2m0[/youtube]

I think Service Dog has been huffing Fang's body glitter spray again.

http://i3.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/ori ... ttmug1.jpg

No! Yes! What of it?!
Fang is more man than you'll ever be. And more woman than you'll ever get.
"Motorboat" isn't just a verb. It's a unit of measurement. One motorboat of body glitter and you're in mother's hairy arms again.
Home... Chrome! ...To Valhalla!1!!

[Dave]

[X] is more man than you'll ever be. And more woman than you'll ever get.

I pray to all the gods I dont believe in that I will someday get to use this line IRL.

[Semi]

About what you'd think....

http://www.latimes.com/business/technol ... story.html

"Gamergate's Anita Sarkeesian has a new focus: History's overlooked women"

[comhcinc]

I fully expect that other iconic movies from the eighties might be remade or get sequels/prequels anytime soon. Maybe Back to the Future will be next.

Not if Ghostbusters does poorly. If it great well then yes the flood gates will open.

[Shatterface]

I don't see how a Back to the Future reboot would work, unless they update it so that Martina McFly travels back to the Eighties.

[feathers]

* You're comparing a medium tank to a heavy, then criticizing the latter for not having medium tank attributes. in any case, the King Tiger PzKpfw VIB was built because Hitler had a small penis. The PzKpfw VI Tiger was fine as an heavy tank;

You bastard!

[comhcinc]

I don't see how a Back to the Future reboot would work, unless they update it so that Martina McFly travels back to the Eighties.

She travels back to the 80s and tags along in the original movie.

I am not going to lie if done well I would totally watch that.

[feathers]

[X] is more man than you'll ever be. And more woman than you'll ever get.

I pray to all the gods I dont believe in that I will someday get to use this line IRL.

It sounds like a Groucho Marx insult.

[jet_lagg]

I don't want to get into this at length, since I get the impression the pit gets annoyed when we debate geeky film stuff (far preferring to flame over the relative merits of WWII tanks), but no, Luke didn't become the best pilot in the rebellion. He was part of a large team. He narrowly avoided getting blown out of the sky thanks to an assist from Solo who was an extraordinary pilot, and then he managed to land a shot of a difficulty level we're explicitly told he had made many times before, and even then (probably because it's stressful, under new circumstances, and we're trying to add some actual tension to the scene) only after tapping into an ability they'd been setting up through dialogue and visual storytelling the entire length of the movie.

This isn't me nitpicking over the inevitable nonsense that sneaks into any good story. We all know you need to fudge a little. That's why the drunken vietnam vet who's only flown cropdusters since the war steps into a modern jet in Independence Day and we just kind of say "yeah, why not." If he started dogfighting like Will Smith? People will get a little bit irked. And Rey went way beyond that. So far beyond it I wonder what the point of debating the matter is. If someone doesn't think she was as clear an example of a Mary Sue as James Bond? Nothing I can say is going to convince that person.

where, exactly, did Abrams actually say that.

I don't want to be a dick, dude, but I did say he "implicitly" stated it.

He made a shot SIMILAR to one he'd landed. With no one shooting at him and lasers that went straight, not a missle that has to do a 90-degree turn to hit right.

and if you want to go into "backstory that wasn't in the movie", Rey spent all her spare time flying sims of every ship she could find. So she was at *least* as experienced a pilot as Luke who, mind you, had never SEEN an X-wing before, much less flown one in combat. Oh, and had maybe 5 minutes of force training time before that shit was telling him how and when to shoot.

We'll leave off how someone who had most likely never seen a large body of water had zero issues being immersed in one (along with garbage) and fighting a large monster without drowning. and the complete lack of even hand to hand combat time, yet there he is on the death star, keeping up with an experienced mercenary. Rey at least got into what looked like fairly serious fights regularly.

You can spin all you like, but Luke was just as magical as Rey.

Nah, this is exactly why I don't want to get into it. Point out the most obvious of Mary Sues and fans of that character will start breaking out the errata to justify the clear excesses. Nevermind if the movie in question has a scene that's explicitly about stating how surprising it is Rey can pilot that way (surprising to her even). I go down this road and you'll make me debate with you over relative targeting systems of x-wings vs T-16's. No fucking thanks dude.

And Luke had "no problem" fighting the monster? I swear you're trolling now. As with last time I ran into these sort of apologetics, I'll bow out and cede you the last word.

[Kirbmarc]

I don't see how a Back to the Future reboot would work, unless they update it so that Martina McFly travels back to the Eighties.

Actually that could work (kind of). We're already in the midst of Eighties nostalgia.

[Shatterface]

I don't see how a Back to the Future reboot would work, unless they update it so that Martina McFly travels back to the Eighties.

She travels back to the 80s and tags along in the original movie.

I am not going to lie if done well I would totally watch that.

Even if, this time round, her father is the one who wants to get into her pants?

[comhcinc]

I don't see how a Back to the Future reboot would work, unless they update it so that Martina McFly travels back to the Eighties.

She travels back to the 80s and tags along in the original movie.

I am not going to lie if done well I would totally watch that.

Even if, this time round, her father is the one who wants to get into her pants?

Well he can't because those things didn't happen. Buuuuut what if she and Biff become a thing?

[Ape+lust]

http://imgur.com/vzpsOCP.jpg

[MarcusAu]

I don't see how a Back to the Future reboot would work, unless they update it so that Martina McFly travels back to the Eighties.

She travels back to the 80s and tags along in the original movie.

I am not going to lie if done well I would totally watch that.

Shit's been done.

Spoiler - Heinlein's "All You Zombies" was adapted as "Predestination" in 2014

[comhcinc]

I don't see how a Back to the Future reboot would work, unless they update it so that Martina McFly travels back to the Eighties.

She travels back to the 80s and tags along in the original movie.

I am not going to lie if done well I would totally watch that.

Shit's been done.

Spoiler - Heinlein's "All You Zombies" was adapted as "Predestination" in 2014

Everything has been done. There is nothing original under the sun.

It's not the quality of the tune but the quality of the musician.

Gandersauce?

[Service Dog]

[X] is more man than you'll ever be. And more woman than you'll ever get.

I pray to all the gods I dont believe in that I will someday get to use this line IRL.

I got to use it once!

My highschool girlfriend turned lesbian-- so, instead of getting the message that she wasn't gonna stay my girlfriend-- I started reading radical feminist theory & crappy lesbian erotica... the whole gender/gay section at the public library. There was a book called "More Man Than You'll Ever Be/ More Woman Than You'll Ever Get" (titled after something a drag queen said.) It treated shit-gay-dudes-say as an oral traditon of folklore. Documenting urban legends, like a dude being trapped in a glory hole... by an anonymous hatpin skewering his dick crosswise. Or the folk-wisdom of brown drapes... to wipe assfucking residue off yer dick.
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/6 ... 3,200_.jpg

A year later, I fished a sexy spandex-y little black dress out of a donation bin, put it on my replacement-girlfriend & fucked her. Then we were going to a party, so I wore the dress. Wolf in sheeps clothing-- that thing was license to ignore normal social boundaries... girls were grinding on me on the dancefloor, I wrestled the hottest one on a mattress. She later became a world famous dancer.

I wanted to wear the dress to my other friends' dorm, to see how they reacted. But the party was on that row of frathouses on 114th Street & the sidewalk was noisy with drunk bros. So I slipped a kitchen knife up the sleeve of the dress. Just in case.

Sure enough, a knot of frat guys started following me & heckling me. I waited until I was right in front of my destination & spun-around... whipped out the knife... yelled, "I'm more man than you'll ever be! And more woman than you'll ever get!"... and charged at them. They evacuated topspeed. It was glorious.

[feathers]

http://imgur.com/vzpsOCP.jpg

The devil is in the details. A very tiny.... detail. I wonder who notices.

[Old_ones]

http://imgur.com/vzpsOCP.jpg

:lol:

Excellent work.

[MarcusAu]

Shit's been done.

Spoiler - Heinlein's "All You Zombies" was adapted as "Predestination" in 2014

Everything has been done. There is nothing original under the sun.

It's not the quality of the tune but the quality of the musician.

Gandersauce?

I haven't seen everything - so I can't say if it's has all been done or not.

I do enjoy movies that have some unique character or flavour to them.

For instance instead of watching the new Ghostbusters - I would rather re-watch the original, or see "The Innocents" or "A Chinese Ghost Story" or "Topper" or "Randall and Hopkirk (Deceased)"...anything really.


YMMV

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

I don't see how a Back to the Future reboot would work, unless they update it so that Martina McFly travels back to the Eighties.

Black to the Future. 100% win.

[MarcusAu]

I don't see how a Back to the Future reboot would work, unless they update it so that Martina McFly travels back to the Eighties.

Black to the Future. 100% win.

Did you check to see if that was a porn title before posting?

[Scented Nectar]

Well, hasn't there been a slow down in the SJ tempo since Dawkin's stroke which was announced Feb 10/11.

Seriously, has anything really happened in the last month?

As a boil comes to a head, parts of it start to dry up. Eventually, those bits fall off until nothing remains but healthy tissue.

I hope.

[Dave]

A year later, I fished a sexy spandex-y little black dress out of a donation bin, put it on my replacement-girlfriend & fucked her. Then we were going to a party, so I wore the dress. Wolf in sheeps clothing-- that thing was license to ignore normal social boundaries... girls were grinding on me on the dancefloor, I wrestled the hottest one on a mattress. She later became a world famous dancer.

Minus the world famous dancer, this matches my experience. Put on a dress as a guy and you can get away with murder.

I wanted to wear the dress to my other friends' dorm, to see how they reacted. But the party was on that row of frathouses on 114th Street & the sidewalk was noisy with drunk bros. So I slipped a kitchen knife up the sleeve of the dress. Just in case.

Sure enough, a knot of frat guys started following me & heckling me. I waited until I was right in front of my destination & spun-around... whipped out the knife... yelled, "I'm more man than you'll ever be! And more woman than you'll ever get!"... and charged at them. They evacuated topspeed. It was glorious.

Brilliant, just fucking brilliant!

[Dave]

I don't see how a Back to the Future reboot would work, unless they update it so that Martina McFly travels back to the Eighties.

Black to the Future. 100% win.

Did you check to see if that was a porn title before posting?

Why would he need to check? Could there be any doubt?

[Cunning Punt]

http://imgur.com/vzpsOCP.jpg

:lol:

Excellent work.

Brilliant. Who's mooning us, I wonder.

I'm only slightly disappointed that Trick Dick wasn't being slimed. Or is it "Slymed"?

[MarcusAu]

Joe Rogan sits down to have a talk with Micheal Shermer

[youtube]2iNpECn_8WQ[/youtube]

I don't know if I can be bothered to listen for 3 hours (!) though.

[Billie from Ockham]

Only Carrier would spin the mundanity of self-employed taxes as proof of massive success.

If sending people copies of your book is "peer review" then filing Schedule Cs is proof that one is a member of the 1%.

[Eskarina]

About what you'd think....

http://www.latimes.com/business/technol ... story.html

"Gamergate's Anita Sarkeesian has a new focus: History's overlooked women"

It gets worse.

No comment, just :angry-banghead:

[Oglebart]

Ape+Lust

Top work as usual, this one is savagely topical though, bravo!


Service Dog

Thanks for posting the Regular Car Review. I can't believe I've never seen it. I've got a huge back catalogue to work through now, this is one of my favourites so far, and right on point with the Back to the Future conversation. Very funny, this is how good the internet can be.

[youtube]XhAlWTyviKA[/youtube]

[free thoughtpolice]

Tfoot sends Anita another death threat:
[youtube]EXLUt2wPNL8[/youtube]

[Service Dog]

Ape+Lust

Top work as usual, this one is savagely topical though, bravo!


Service Dog

Thanks for posting the Regular Car Review. I can't believe I've never seen it. I've got a huge back catalogue to work through now, this is one of my favourites so far, and right on point with the Back to the Future conversation. Very funny, this is how good the internet can be.

This Ferrari review is an interesting book-end to the DeLorean reviews...
[youtube]kM1GY8vbzEc[/youtube]

And... when you do finally exhaust the Regular Car Reviews catalogue... are you familiar with Plinkett Reviews...?

[comhcinc]

These are the gifts I bring.

[youtube]izYE04Zko5c[/youtube]

[Service Dog]

These are the gifts I bring.

[youtube]izYE04Zko5c[/youtube]

I've supported him until now. But he's breaking peniskayfabe. He's exposing the junk business! This hurts us all.

[comhcinc]

These are the gifts I bring.

[youtube]izYE04Zko5c[/youtube]

I've supported him until now. But he's breaking peniskayfabe. He's exposing the junk business! This hurts us all.

It just goes to proof that even fancy New York City Yankee Lawyers don't understand pro wrestling.

[Service Dog]

That's in ny? I'm shocked they let him wear the bandana. Also: lol at the the paper cups.

[DaveDodo007]

Went surfing, and this blog's assessment of the T-34: it was a piece of crap:

http://chris-intel-corner.blogspot.com/ ... f-war.html

http://chris-intel-corner.blogspot.gr/2 ... oviet.html

Discuss.

Apparently a Sherman is not as bad as a T-34.

Mainly because, before they are killed by the Germans, the American crew is far more comfortable and far more likely to be reliably transported to the killing zone.

It is the least they could do, literally. :dance:

[DaveDodo007]

FFS, "It’s the belief that women are people" are they still pushing this bullcrap. It must be true because all the books written before anybody had even heard of feminism used to have 'people AND women' in them. :roll:

<snip>

It is the case that 'people' used to be used to mean 'men', at least in some places & situations. (Probably still the case in some places in the world, but I don't have details handy.) As a* historical example, the US Constitution opens with "We the people", which could be gender-neutral, but then it goes on to say in Article I that "The House of Representatives shall be composed of members chosen every second year by the people of the several states", in which "people" means "people who can vote", which was in fact not all "people" (not women, and not all men either).

I'm delighted to recognize & celebrate the people (including the suffragettes) who worked at various times in the past to expand the rights of those groups who weren't originally included. I'd welcome clarification regarding the specific areas in which women are currently demonstrably not considered to be people, and would be interested to hear how feminist-people plan to address those specific areas.

* "a historical" or "an historical" ? ;)

What you traitorous, tax dodging rebel scum did after you stabbed us in the back is no concern of mine. The mighty British Empire has had plenty of strong, independent women who (sometimes) don't need no man, to lead us. Christ we even voted one in once, along with voting for joos and catlicks as leaders. :shifty: If you choose to follow the misogynist shitlord founding fathers then you don't get to sing: God save our gracious Queen. :snooty: You do get to sing about God blessing some arbitrary piece of land, you must be so proud. :twisted:

[AndrewV69]

http://imgur.com/vzpsOCP.jpg

:o :o :o :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Keating]

I fully expect that other iconic movies from the eighties might be remade or get sequels/prequels anytime soon. Maybe Back to the Future will be next.

The guy behind Back to the Future has said "over my dead body" to a reboot/remake, so that cash cow will have to wait until he carks it.

[MarcusAu]

What you traitorous, tax dodging rebel scum did after you stabbed us in the back is no concern of mine. The mighty British Empire has had plenty of strong, independent women who (sometimes) don't need no man, to lead us. Christ we even voted one in once, along with voting for joos and catlicks as leaders. :shifty: If you choose to follow the misogynist shitlord founding fathers then you don't get to sing: God save our gracious Queen. :snooty: You do get to sing about God blessing some arbitrary piece of land, you must be so proud. :twisted:

All stand please for Dame Byng's redention of the National Anthem

[youtube]wXu-j3_8rXE[/youtube]

[Outed1TimeAsGrey!]

Seeing the posting of a Shermer video of 3 hours reminds me of the great honour I once had of listening to a speech by the Bolivian 21 st Century socialist Hugo Chavas, renown as having 'charisma'.

After his 30 minute preamble he mentioned being at a political meeting and then listed some of those present, then having said a name he gave some biography about that person and in the middle of that bio, having mentioned a town he told us about that town and how he once walked through the main street when he bumped into someone whose life was interesting for the next 10 minutes until he mentioned a holiday festival that that person had been at and so some history about that festival and who Hugo had met on such a day and......

...reminds me of reading posts on slymepit except he didn't mention the Shermer tank even once.

[Outed1TimeAsGrey!]

What I liked about the original ghostbusters was that it was original.


It is hard to re-capture that in a remake.

[Malky]

Porn users more gender egalitarian? How will SJWs react to this!

http://www.skepticink.com/avant-garde/2 ... orn-users/

[KiwiInOz]

The logic behind it seems fairly obvious: nostalgia + socially aware + targeting the majority of the population = $$$

as others have said, real money was spent on this. It may flop, but anyone thinking there's a reason for this getting made other than $$$$$$$$ has no understanding of how the film industry thinks.

Yeah, I agree, although I think that in the case of the Ghostbusters remake the logic may have not been sound. The trailer, at least, was very bad. The humor fell forced, the jokes were stale. Perhaps the film is better, but if that's the overall quality I really think that it will flop.

In general, though, the logic behind most cash cows these days has been based on 70s-80s nostalgia with some added important female characters. Either that or superhero movies. So you can understand why they remade Ghostbusters.

I fully expect that other iconic movies from the eighties might be remade or get sequels/prequels anytime soon. Maybe Back to the Future will be next.

Or possibly The Fantastic Four.

[John D]

Numbers over size. Detroit steel.
[youtube]Bj0AzL95Weg[/youtube]

[MarcusAu]

If Hollywood is going to remake something - why not a movie that already had a strong female cast

[youtube]N4Dt2SQ7DV4[/youtube]

[DaveDodo007]

It was only a matter of time before the victim narrative come to this, fuck it is a good job they don't like (mondays) guns.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/p ... -1.3459770

[Cnutella]

Shanley is now raging over Google hiring Moot:

How could Google, supposedly dedicated to stemming online harassment, and increasing the diversity and inclusivity of its workforce and userbase, hire the white man who not only created, but personally oversaw 4chan for over 10 years — a site whose only claim to fame is hosting, harboring, coddling, incubating and disseminating hate, harassment, groupthink, violence and terrorism?

4chan evokes a visceral sensation of fear and trepidation in many marginalized Internet users. The pain, terror, humiliation and suffering of people who have been victimized by 4chan is REAL.

https://modelviewculture.com/news/googl ... ized-users

Is this on par with the editor of a magazine dedicated to raising the profile of minorities in technology having sex with someone she knew to be the former president of the Gay Nigger Association of America and a notorious white power advocate? As far as I know, 4chan never made it onto the Terrorism Research Analysis Consortium list as a cyberterrorist group, unlike the GNAA.

No, I think Google probably win this one.

[windy]

In honor of international women's day: a feminist and recreational man-hater almost discovers gigolos

http://i.imgur.com/AORy04F.png

[comhcinc]

That's in ny? I'm shocked they let him wear the bandana. Also: lol at the the paper cups.

That trial is happening in Florida. The bandana thing is something else.

[BarnOwl]

Of course I don't want Richard Dawkins to be a ghost, but that image was just too brilliant to pass up.

[Jan Steen]

Dr. Richard Carrier PhD, Plagiarist Extraordinaire

Back in November 2015, I wrote:

I could give many examples of laughably wrong statements in this book [Carrier's Sense and Goodness without God]. Consider the following:

Many animals have unique personalities, memories, and mental abilities, and can be “conscious” of their surroundings, even to a certain extent themselves. But to be able to fully perceive themselves—as a mind, as a person—requires a special organ capable of such a computation, and an organ capable of perceiving a whole pattern of such a size and complexity would have to be vastly complex itself, far more than any other sensory organ like, say, the human eye.

It just so happens that we have one of these: a cerebral cortex, the most complex biological organ in the world—in fact, as far as we know, the most complex thing in the whole universe. Animal brains are simpler, lacking this organ.

So much wrong and so little time. Of course, all mammals have a cerebral cortex; this is not some kind of unique, independently evolved organ that is only found in humans, as Carrier seems to believe. Mice have a cerebral cortex. Chimps have one. There are dolphins with more neurons in their cerebral cortex than Richard Carrier.

What we see here are the over-confident statements of the person who lacks the knowledge to realize that he is spouting nonsense. A deluded sufferer from the Dunning-Kruger effect.

On 7 March 2016, Carrier published a list with corrections to his lousy book, which he modestly describes as "a really good and solid worldview survey. Nothing like it exists (by me or anyone). It’s still the place to start if you want to examine and build a complete worldview."

Right. And what is correction number five?

(5) But the only significant overt factual error I have identified is in section III.6.1 (p. 136). There I state that animals lack a cerebral cortex. That’s incorrect. All mammals have one.

Are we to believe that Carrier himself "identified" this factual error (which is of course far from the only significant one)? Well, I don't. We know that Carrier was aware of this thread about him, because he scoffed about it:

A book review in the Slymepit? Enough said.

Plagiarism is not just copying texts without attribution; it is also presenting other people's ideas without attribution. I am convinced that Carrier has read my takedown of his stupid book, and that only then he noticed his blunder about animals lacking a cerebral cortex. That he now pretends that he "identified" this error himself makes Carrier a plagiarist.

Not that I am in the least surprised. We already knew that he is a totally dishonest scumbag and a liar.

Apart from that, this latest piece of his contains his usual posturing. This failed historian once more pretends that he is an expert in theoretical physics:

For example, in section III.3.3 (pp. 75-76). Though the coverage there remains factually correct, for various reasons I now believe Chaotic Inflation Theory (CIT) is more likely to be correct than Smolin Selection Theory (SST), although they are compatible and thus could both be true, and either remains plausible on known evidence

Always good for a laugh, our Sticky Dicky.

[comhcinc]

https://www.seedandspark.com/studio/ord ... n#wishlist

Ordinary Women: Daring to Defy History is Feminist Frequency's new video series about challenging stereotypes, smashing the status quo, and being defiant.

I already knew five of the women. The only one I didn't was the Japanese bink.