Exposing the stupidity, lies, and hypocrisy of Social Justice Warriors since July 2012
http://slymepit.com/phpbb/
Sunni and Cherfeathers wrote:Why did someone bother wiping out all names? They're all Anonymous, this is 4chan, duh.Steersman wrote:And, from the same source:
Reddit also has some (mind that mouse cursor):KiwiInOz wrote:Sunni and Cher
Sonny and Shia
Sunni and Shia. Ha. Take that.
Hmm.feathers wrote:Reddit also has some (mind that mouse cursor):KiwiInOz wrote:Sunni and Cher
Sonny and Shia
Sunni and Shia. Ha. Take that.
Allah long the watchtower
The Taliband
Meccalica
Metallicallah
Fatwa Slim
The Joo Fighters
Also note the text in the band's photo: Battle of the Bands.
Falafeland?Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:Fuck, you guys are good. I can't come up with anything. Maybe Floatsam And Islam?
One thing I've started wondering is why Soros doesn't get as much hate as the Koch brothers. Maybe this just means that I'm not reading enough right-wing news sources.free thoughtpolice wrote:[youtube]W7I92r9GqUw[/youtube]
Now you've got to come up with some of your own. It's only fajr.Keating wrote:Oh crap, I broke a streak.
Carrier is a wooist at this point, breatharians are more skeptical than he is.Dave wrote:Did anyone ever suspect that he would do otherwise?Brive1987 wrote: By not criticising or denying membership, Carrier has jumped the shark fully - elevating free-fucks above Skeptical thought.
The Animals?feathers wrote:Now you've got to come up with some of your own. It's only fajr.Keating wrote:Oh crap, I broke a streak.
Well the Christians did burn them at the stake and whatnot, so there is that I suppose.comhcinc wrote:
People like to say atheists hate christians and god and such and there are a group of or mostly young atheist that do.
But I have found that the real hate come from the alternative religion crowd. Wiccans and the such just drip vile for christians and they seem to hold on to that well into their 50s.
Nah, Wicca is a modern religion based on Madeupstuff and The Great Book of MaFeelz. It has no basis in the old religions from which it claims heritage.DaveDodo007 wrote:Well the Christians did burn them at the stake and whatnot, so there is that I suppose.comhcinc wrote:
People like to say atheists hate christians and god and such and there are a group of or mostly young atheist that do.
But I have found that the real hate come from the alternative religion crowd. Wiccans and the such just drip vile for christians and they seem to hold on to that well into their 50s.
This, from a dolt who was selling Angry Birds surlies until she got busted.Ape+lust wrote:Surly Amy is kicking up scores of angry tweets because she's been stolen from again, this time by a t-shirt company.
Ape+lust wrote:Surly Amy is kicking up scores of angry tweets because she's been stolen from again, this time by a t-shirt company.
[i.mg]http://imgur.com/AIERNKh.jpg[/img]
[.]http://imgur.com/fz1W62u.jpg[/img]
[.]http://imgur.com/VDjotjS.jpg[/img]
Remember she was angry a few years ago because we used her images to ridicule her? She learned a bit about fair use (and that she couldn't do anything about us) and in a fit of enlightenment, opened most of her image collection under a Creative Commons license.
Guess which image was the first pic in the first bunch released?
[.]http://imgur.com/ZzKki9q.jpg[/img]
She kept calling the new license "non-commercial", but the one she actually used contains no such restriction. The only requirements are the original author be credited and derivatives be similarly licensed.
Amy has forgotten she's already given the t-shirt company permission to sell their knock-off. They've been grovelling, but that could turn into giving her the finger if they found out :D
OOPS!
There is nothing wrong with being a contrarian as the pit was made for it but I think you are trying too hard here and it is tiresome. I personally hate white knights and think they should be shot in the face so their mothers can't display their bodies in an open coffin as a shaming tool. Though you know as well as I do that Abbie was blackballed by the atheist/secular/science community. Whilst Rebecca 'I wish I had a abortion so I could post on a hashtag fucking sick monster' Watson and other vigina owners were flown around the world on expenses paid trips even though they wouldn't know science even if you shoved a microscope up their arse. The only reason they were atheists in the first place was they were not indoctrinated as children as they had no skepticism or they wouldn't have become feminists.welch wrote:Whatsamatter Abbs, there's a set of lips here not firmly on your ass? Oh, if only I had acknowledged your blog over and over as I have in this squabble.ERV wrote:Jesus fuck, welch. Did you recently take a railroad spike to the brain? 'Hey, person who had a science blog for 8 years! Person who talked to the general public about science whenever asked, despite terrible stage fright! If you want to educate laymen on science, get off your ass and do something about it!'welch wrote:I've also said that if Abbie and other "proper" scientists don't like the fact that Scibabe has become one of the main faces of public science communication, especially in the food woo arena, that maybe they should get off their asses and fix that, if they really think it's a problem.
But hey, fuck accuracy right? This is your safe space, I'm probably wrong for questioning you on anything at this point.
Not that you care, because you've pretty much shit accuracy away in this case, but the point isn't that you don't have a blog, because you do. It's that outside of the sciblogs audience it effectively doesn't exist.
Here, let me put this in simple terms you might understand: Blogs parallel papers in this respect. If barely anyone reads a paper or cites it and no one really knows it exists, what value does it have in a practical sense? The blogs that matter are the ones that people know about, otherwise your winking in the dark.
It's why Mendel's work didn't mean fuck all until long after his death, because no one read his work or knew about it. He was right, mostly, and he'd done good work, but no one knew about it, so effectively, it didn't fucking matter. You could have the cure for fucking cancer in a box in your closet, but if no one else knows about it, it does no one any fucking good. Three steps outside of sciblogs, no one knows about shit there, so in terms of general effectiveness, it's a circle jerk in a basement at midnight. Feels good for the participants, no one walking by knows or cares.
Poor fucking baby, you didn't get feted by Gawker. Wah. None of you want to do the work to get the (highly valuable) stuff you're writing about marketed out to the larger world. You're like those moronic Indie Devs who think marketing is for suckers, then wonder why no one is buying their shit. Words on a blog is only the FIRST part. The rest of it involves making sure the right people know you're writing it. You can shit on Watson all day long, and deservedly so, but she has out-marketed and out-PR'd you every which way possible.ERV wrote:Know why I stopped? It's a thankless job. I have actively supported numerous 'food scientists', who have also run blogs for *years*. They don't get their stuff plugged by Gawker. They haven't had news sites run cutesy biographical sketches. They don't get invited to skeptic events to discuss their area of expertise. Skeptic blogs don't give them awards for their work.
Dawkins gets this. Tyson gets this. They do things like PR and marketing so their words get in the right ears. But you are right, it is regularly thankless work. Which is why so few people do it. But the way shit works outside of the lab is pretty well-established. Facebook. Twitter. The shit you love to laugh at and dismiss. Don't bitch that by not doing the necessary work, you didn't get the attention you think you deserved.
Because no one knows who they are, because they never leave the fucking lab long enough for anyone to know they're there. Jesus christ, how do you fucking think this stuff works? You think a conference organizer has shit loads of spare time to beg people they've never heard of and don't know exist until they go trolling through a facutly list at a local university? If that's what you think, you are so very wrong it's not even funny. Organizing a conference, while not hard in terms of science, is really fucking hard in terms of logistics. It's the worst kind of cat-herding, and if you can save six seconds of time by getting speakers you actually know about, you're going to, because that gives you time to deal with the dickheads at the venue, the stupid fucks doing the catering and the unending ceaseless demands from the special snowflakes who thinks buying a conference pass entitles them to a daily rusty trombone!ERV wrote:A seemingly endless parade of people who didn't give a rats ass about science communication (until they need to pay the water bill) do, though.
I've complained about this for years. Why the fuck would anyone fly Watson to Australia (or Mid Missouri) to speak about science, when so many qualified, eager scientists are on their doorstep?
If the worst thing watson had done was, once, say she should have had a title she didn't really deserve, then you would have totally been overreacting. But it wasn't the first time Watson had been a raging cock to some random person who didn't deserve it. Different situations warrant different responses. I figured you knew this. Evidently I was wrong.ERV wrote:Totally cool when I said that about Watson. Epic tantrum when I say it about your dear, dear Facebook friend.
WankERV wrote:I stopped 'sci comm' because it takes a ton of time and effort, with very little reward, and I can't afford that right now. Science rewards me for my hard work, when it can. So if you want to improve sci comm, welch, I would suggest supporting people who do it, even if they aren't endorsed by Gawker, or whatever future click bait website takes it's place.
Wank
Wank
The people doing the hard, thankless work of trying to talk to people who aren't other scientists do get my support. Like Kevin Folta, who got massacred far worse than you ever came close to.
But he at least gets how this whole publicity thing works. Contrary to what you seem to believe (but hey, you're a scientist, you're an expert on goddamned everything, right?) "build it and they will come" isn't even a line from a movie. It's a fantasy based on zero real world experience. If you want people to listen to you, you have to do the work to get their attention. You don't to do that? Totally cool, that's a valid choice. Most other scientists don't? Totally cool, totally valid choices for all of them.
But having made that choice, you don't get to decide who DOES do the communicating. You opt out of the process, you get to fucking live with the results. It's like voting. Don't want to vote? you don't have to, but at least have the spine to shut the fuck up when your voice goes completely unheard because no one knows it's there.
The problem isn't that you made your choice. The problem is, it's not working out the way you think it should and that's burning your ass so hard, you have a sunburn on your nose.
Wahabbi MondaysKiwiInOz wrote:Sunni and Cherfeathers wrote:Why did someone bother wiping out all names? They're all Anonymous, this is 4chan, duh.Steersman wrote:And, from the same source:
Sonny and Shia
Sunni and Shia. Ha. Take that.
They named the boat after a non-scientist?KiwiInOz wrote:RRS Sir David Attenborough with Boaty McBoatface to be the name of one of the submersibles.
Keating wrote:One thing I've started wondering is why Soros doesn't get as much hate as the Koch brothers. Maybe this just means that I'm not reading enough right-wing news sources.free thoughtpolice wrote:[youtube]W7I92r9GqUw[/youtube]
I was having a good time with some standard Pit banter. You flip the fuck out. I try to keep discussing this with you. I get home from work and find out you have unfriended people you have known for years and years and years over this.welch wrote:<snip tantrum>
Kind of.comhcinc wrote:I think everyone is kinda talking past each other.CaptainFluffyBunny wrote:You know, I'm honestly confused about what Welch is going on about. A person that never really markets themselves as a scientist, who clearly is accenting the Babe part, suddenly turn on a dime and yell sexism for promoters using their own marketing. It boggles my poor damaged mind. And poor Welch is so clearly wrapped around the axle. Call me confused and amused.
People can correct me if I am wrong but from what I understand it's something like this.
Scibabe said something dumb on twitter. This started the discussion on what exactly is a scientist.
Welch feels that Scibabe is actually cool and should not be labeled an enemy because of two tweets.
ERV feels Scibabe isn't a scientist and that people like her get more attention than they deserve. She feels that people like herself don't get enough respect and I think she is completely right. That isn't because she bought me a beer either. It's because she is making the world a better place.
As brive has pointed out everyone is arguing about different things.
You're right, you are not reading enough right wing news sources.Keating wrote:One thing I've started wondering is why Soros doesn't get as much hate as the Koch brothers. Maybe this just means that I'm not reading enough right-wing news sources.free thoughtpolice wrote:[youtube]W7I92r9GqUw[/youtube]
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :clap: :clap: :clap:Keating wrote:Oh, I got one: Faith Yes More
Here's oneDaveDodo007 wrote:You're right, you are not reading enough right wing news sources.Keating wrote: One thing I've started wondering is why Soros doesn't get as much hate as the Koch brothers. Maybe this just means that I'm not reading enough right-wing news sources.
Cuckseratives don't count because cucks.
DaveDodo007 wrote:Well the Christians did burn them at the stake and whatnot, so there is that I suppose.comhcinc wrote:
People like to say atheists hate christians and god and such and there are a group of or mostly young atheist that do.
But I have found that the real hate come from the alternative religion crowd. Wiccans and the such just drip vile for christians and they seem to hold on to that well into their 50s.
As online naming things go it beats 'Hitler did nothing wrong' by a country mile. :PShatterface wrote:They named the boat after a non-scientist?KiwiInOz wrote:RRS Sir David Attenborough with Boaty McBoatface to be the name of one of the submersibles.
Why not his brother, who cloned dinosaurs?
I am somehow wary of naming streets, vessels etc. after people still alive, even if they're 90 yrs old. Let's first make sure they don't have too many skeletons in the closet after they die.KiwiInOz wrote:RRS Sir David Attenborough with Boaty McBoatface to be the name of one of the submersibles.
Well Creative Commons doesn't actually do anything if Amy wants to press it. It would be a shitty thing to do but she has the right to enforce her IP.Ape+lust wrote:
Amy has forgotten she's already given the t-shirt company permission to sell their knock-off. They've been grovelling, but that could turn into giving her the finger if they found out :D
OOPS!
Those gorillas gave clear consent.feathers wrote:I am somehow wary of naming streets, vessels etc. after people still alive, even if they're 90 yrs old. Let's first make sure they don't have too many skeletons in the closet after they die.KiwiInOz wrote:RRS Sir David Attenborough with Boaty McBoatface to be the name of one of the submersibles.
[youtube]SE6jy78tV78[/youtube]DaveDodo007 wrote:Cuckseratives don't count because cucks.
Woot I kind of understand something!ERV wrote: Kind of.
Wiccas are witch-kins. It's all identity politics. Many wiccas are sjws, too.comhcinc wrote:DaveDodo007 wrote:Well the Christians did burn them at the stake and whatnot, so there is that I suppose.comhcinc wrote:
People like to say atheists hate christians and god and such and there are a group of or mostly young atheist that do.
But I have found that the real hate come from the alternative religion crowd. Wiccans and the such just drip vile for christians and they seem to hold on to that well into their 50s.
No they didn't. At most they burned some people they kinda sorta connect with hundreds of years ago.
Cuckoid is an old word. It is found in older literature and then fell out of favor. A hundred years ago a cuckold was a man who was married to a woman who manipulated him. She was only married to him for his money or power. Often she was younger and more attractive than he. She was generally unfaithful... and this during a time when cheating was a big deal to people.comhcinc wrote:[youtube]SE6jy78tV78[/youtube]DaveDodo007 wrote:Cuckseratives don't count because cucks.
Full Definition of cuckold
: a man whose wife is unfaithful
cuckold transitive verb
China has always had no problem dealing very harshly with any minority group that they believe may, or might, never mind is, giving them the least bit of a problem.Steersman wrote: <choppage>
First Angola and now China (more or less); one hopes it's the beginning of a (reasoned) stampede, more or less.
Ericb wrote:One thing I've started wondering is why Soros doesn't get as much hate as the Koch brothers. Maybe this just means that I'm not reading enough right-wing news sources.
I've understood 'cuck' to now refer to people who enjoy watching their country get fucked.comhcinc wrote:You are right John but recently it has been used for a fetish and from that fetish it's being used but people as an insult by butthurt people.
If North Korea explicitly outlawed Islam, Steersman would made plenty of positive references to Kim Jong Un in our forums.AndrewV69 wrote:China has always had no problem dealing very harshly with any minority group that they believe may, or might, never mind is, giving them the least bit of a problem.Steersman wrote: <choppage>
First Angola and now China (more or less); one hopes it's the beginning of a (reasoned) stampede, more or less.
They will go N.Korea on your ass at the slightest excuse. Other than that China is pretty easygoing.
Infidel Decapitationfeathers wrote:Queens of the stoned age
Link?Brive1987 wrote:Yes, some poor bastard didn't get the "end all rational debate' memo.
http://i.imgur.com/ypJ1dow.jpg
Fuck, I read that as 'RIP'. Gave me a scare.KiwiInOz wrote:RRS Sir David Attenborough with Boaty McBoatface to be the name of one of the submersibles.
That's kinda my point. I can also find plenty of "Why do lefties hate the Koch brothers?" articles. I've never bothered to read up much on either, but I've seen enough articles from left wing sites complaining about how much money and influence they inject into right wing causes, and several articles from right wing sites complaining about how much money and influence Soros injects into left wing causes.Keating wrote:Ericb wrote:One thing I've started wondering is why Soros doesn't get as much hate as the Koch brothers. Maybe this just means that I'm not reading enough right-wing news sources.
http://www.politico.com/story/2010/10/w ... ros-044343
