Periodic Table of Swearing
-
- .
- Posts: 3744
- Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 1:18 pm
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Great cartoon, although it has to be noted that Rebecca's hair is now blue.
She can't change the fact that she is a rapist, though.
She can't change the fact that she is a rapist, though.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
It's just a word right now, Renee
Try to keep a clear head, and don't panic over the unknown.
can someone else explain to me why so many women are unable to comprehend this?
Try to keep a clear head, and don't panic over the unknown.
can someone please explain this to my mum?welch wrote: So while (s)he may not talk about it a lot, it may not be a show of strength. (S)he may just genuinely not want to talk about it constantly, and get rather annoyed if it's all (s)he gets to talk about for the next few months... if (s)he doesn't want to talk about it, let him (her) not talk about it.
can someone else explain to me why so many women are unable to comprehend this?
-
- .
- Posts: 2244
- Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 9:48 am
- Location: Kent, WA
- Contact:
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Trying very hard to do so, Sacha. And the very reason why I mentioned it here and nowhere else (meaning where my family frequent) is because I have a few relatives who do not understand that we *don't* want it to be a topic of discussion on a daily basis (the way my family members handle these things). Constantly asking every day how you're feeling, what's going on, what have the doctors said, have you done this, have you done that, on and on. So, we opting to keep this very, very local - me, him, my kids and that's it.sacha wrote:It's just a word right now, Renee
Try to keep a clear head, and don't panic over the unknown.
can someone please explain this to my mum?welch wrote: So while (s)he may not talk about it a lot, it may not be a show of strength. (S)he may just genuinely not want to talk about it constantly, and get rather annoyed if it's all (s)he gets to talk about for the next few months... if (s)he doesn't want to talk about it, let him (her) not talk about it.
can someone else explain to me why so many women are unable to comprehend this?
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
great news!lost control wrote:looks like my gal will finally be able to leave the hospital after the upcoming weekend.
I hope so too.lost control wrote:I hope the upcoming weekend will be the last one I'll spend mostly at a hospital bed for some time.
I'll mention your well wishes to MKG.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
the court knew he was not the father:JackRayner wrote:Good 'ol paternity fraud.
That's why I am an advocate for DNA tests. A woman asking "Don't you trust me?", or getting all "offended" is just a fucking red herring. I put much more stock on people's capacity to act like the animals that we are and to then to lie about it forever. You don't? Then, by all means, carry on being a chump and believing that people are all that they say they are...
For 13 years, Hatley made payments to the state until learning, in 2000, that the boy might not be his biological son. A DNA test that year confirmed that there was no chance he was the father, according to court documents.
Hatley returned to court and was relieved of any future child support reimbursement but was ordered to pay more than $16,000 that he had owed the state before the ruling.
Latesha Bradley, an attorney who represented Hatley in that hearing, told CNN the argument for keeping Hatley liable for the back payments was that he had signed a consent agreement with the office of child support services. The court agreed that Hatley had to comply with the consent agreement for the period that he believed the boy was his son.
Court documents show that Hatley for the most part continued to make payments. He was jailed for six months in 2006 for falling behind on payments during a period of unemployment, but afterward he resumed making payments and continued to do so even after he lost another job in 2008 and became homeless, court records state.
Last year, he again became unable to maintain the payments and was once again jailed.
-
- .
- Posts: 1166
- Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 12:27 am
- Location: In the basement of the University of Minnesota Morris
- Contact:
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
I don't condone crap, and I reject the idea that I have any responsibility for prostitution being kept illegal, or for some serial killer going after them because they've internalized whatever value system, or even just some automatic reaction, that causes them to see prostitutes as worthy of death. There are LOTS of laws in the books that I think are bullshit. How exactly am I supposed to show that I don't condone them? Break them? Shoot a lawmaker/law enforcer in the face, maybe? (It's easier to do with societal norms, but I'm not exactly always winning friends when I speak out against woo, homophobia, feminism, theism, "true love", PETA, the green movement, "bro code", many kinds of moral outrages sold as objective morality,and all sorts of other shit that I think is just straight up retarded. [lol, ableism.])Steersman wrote: Sorry, should have provided a link and a quote earlier:The homicide rate for female prostitutes was estimated to be 204 per 100,000,[2] which is considerably higher than that for the next riskiest occupations in the United States during a similar period (4 per 100,000 for female liquor store workers and 29 per 100,000 for male taxicab drivers).
As for who is doing the killing and what their motivations are, that seems to be quite a bit more difficult to determine than just the number of them. But the article indicates that they seem to be “favoured†by serial murderers, one of whom – Gary Ridgway, the Green River Killer – said in a documentary I remember seeing that he figured he was doing society a favour by killing them. Raises some interesting questions – some sticky wickets, actually – as to how much society is culpable in those crimes.I’m reminded of, although I don’t have the details handy at the moment, that just after the end of the second world war a whole bunch of the townspeople in places like Belsen and Auschwitz were marched through the concentration camps to show them what they had been part of or had in effect condoned.
I do what I can. I spread awareness among the people that I know on things that I think are problematic and vote against shitty laws. Unless it is cause by my order or by my own hand, no one's death is on me.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
All these years presenting SGU and globetrotting - turns out Rebecca Watson is a rapist.
Full marks for honesty, and all that - but from now on I have no other option than to refer her as Self Confessed Rapist, Rebecca Watson.
Full marks for honesty, and all that - but from now on I have no other option than to refer her as Self Confessed Rapist, Rebecca Watson.
-
- .
- Posts: 1166
- Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 12:27 am
- Location: In the basement of the University of Minnesota Morris
- Contact:
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
I know. Call it retroactive parental fraud in this instance, then. :Dsacha wrote:the court knew he was not the father:JackRayner wrote:Good 'ol paternity fraud.
That's why I am an advocate for DNA tests. A woman asking "Don't you trust me?", or getting all "offended" is just a fucking red herring. I put much more stock on people's capacity to act like the animals that we are and to then to lie about it forever. You don't? Then, by all means, carry on being a chump and believing that people are all that they say they are...
For 13 years, Hatley made payments to the state until learning, in 2000, that the boy might not be his biological son. A DNA test that year confirmed that there was no chance he was the father, according to court documents.
Hatley returned to court and was relieved of any future child support reimbursement but was ordered to pay more than $16,000 that he had owed the state before the ruling.
Latesha Bradley, an attorney who represented Hatley in that hearing, told CNN the argument for keeping Hatley liable for the back payments was that he had signed a consent agreement with the office of child support services. The court agreed that Hatley had to comply with the consent agreement for the period that he believed the boy was his son.
Court documents show that Hatley for the most part continued to make payments. He was jailed for six months in 2006 for falling behind on payments during a period of unemployment, but afterward he resumed making payments and continued to do so even after he lost another job in 2008 and became homeless, court records state.
Last year, he again became unable to maintain the payments and was once again jailed.
He could have never agreed to anything had he know it wasn't his son from the start, though I fully understand that DNA testing wasn't exactly widely available back then....Hatley had to comply with the consent agreement for the period that he believed the boy was his son.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
[youtube]9CqbO_5FKRc[/youtube]Wild Zontargs wrote:I'm prepared to serve as a counter-example if necessary.JackRayner wrote:Just so that I don't jump in before verifying: Did you just say that we all accept "free will" and that the "mind" is something more than just the brain?Steersman wrote:
But, for instance, it seems to be some “Slyme Pit dogmaâ€, an article of faith, that, as Phil is fond of quoting Hitchens on, “What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof.†But while that certainly seems like it generally holds quite a bit of water, it also seems that one can quite reasonably argue that we all accept many things without proof that no level of proof is apparently sufficient to dismiss – free will and that “mind†is something more than just “brainâ€, for examples.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
death by overdose from mainlining oxytocin due to orgasm is not the worst way to go.KiwiInOz wrote:La Petite Mort?sacha wrote:hahaha!decius wrote: Yeah, because as everyone knows, death is the most likely outcome of drunken sex.
-
- .
- Posts: 1166
- Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 12:27 am
- Location: In the basement of the University of Minnesota Morris
- Contact:
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
I blame my quickly deteriorating grammar on my tiredness. Been up since 7 this morning after only a few hours of rest. [20 minutes to midnight here on the East Coast of the U.S.] Like, imagine staying in character for that many hours of the day. Now, replace "character" with "second language", and that's what we've got going on here.JackRayner wrote:HeHatley had to comply with the consent agreement for the period that he believed the boy was his son.couldwould have never agreed to anything had heknowknown it wasn't his son from the start, though I fully understand that DNA testing wasn't exactly widely available back then....
I'm just stating that because I noticed some fuck ups in my response to Steersman, too, and I don't like them. Carry on. :cry:
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
If no one has done so already I would like to show my respect to Justin Vacula for the work he did today. It is a great example of someone who not only pecks away at his keyboard but actually steps away from that keyboard to engage in activism that has an effect on his community, all the people in it, (whether they have internet access or not) and reality. Despite being labeled by people who have no real knowledge of his character as a bad example of atheism and a generally unlikable fellow he did let it get him down. Justin proved today that those people can babble all they wish and claim petty hollow victories to their little black-hearted desire, it does not intimidate him. Justin Vacula will not allow those simplistic socially retarded miscreants lessen his ability to be effective while not being a bitch. When he sees a battle that needs to be fought he gladly rides to the frontline ready to do battle and win! Let those pathetic lurkers stay safe and sound in their homes as if nestled to their mothers bosom feeding on her teat. Children have no place in a real fight anyway. Leave that fight to people like Justin Vacula and screw you Stephanie Zvan.
Great work Justin
Great work Justin
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
precisely. contract null and void, all payments should be reimbursed.JackRayner wrote:
He could have never agreed to anything had he know it wasn't his son from the start
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
not to worry, I understoodJackRayner wrote:I blame my quickly deteriorating grammar on my tiredness. Been up since 7 this morning after only a few hours of rest. [20 minutes to midnight here on the East Coast of the U.S.] Like, imagine staying in character for that many hours of the day. Now, replace "character" with "second language", and that's what we've got going on here.JackRayner wrote:HeHatley had to comply with the consent agreement for the period that he believed the boy was his son.couldwould have never agreed to anything had heknowknown it wasn't his son from the start, though I fully understand that DNA testing wasn't exactly widely available back then....
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Would you believe …?Rystefn wrote:I see no evidence whatsoever that "we all" accept anything of the sort. I'd wager a great deal of money that you'll find many people who reject the idea of mind-brain duality outright, and more than a few that reject the idea of free will as well. Try again.Steersman wrote:But while that certainly seems like it generally holds quite a bit of water, it also seems that one can quite reasonably argue that we all accept many things without proof that no level of proof is apparently sufficient to dismiss – free will and that “mind†is something more than just “brainâ€, for examples.
Sorry – I should have been clearer; I wasn’t arguing that we all accept without proof, for example, the free-will hypothesis, only that we all accept different things without proof, more or less by necessity. However, somewhat in the nature of the beast, it seems that even the contrary hypothesis – that there is no free-will – is still something that many other people accept as an article of faith which still has no conclusive proof.
As for more prosaic examples, those might be a little harder to come by, although the fact that some 60% of Americans supposedly believe that “angels and demons are active in the world†might be a good start. However, my impression is still that many of our day-to-day beliefs could qualify as, in Einstein’s words, little more than “stubbornly persistent illusions†that we cling to with some tenacity yet without conclusive proof.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
You're still wrong. Some of us look into those things and try to figure out if they're true, and some of us shrug our shoulders and say, "fuck it." Except for the angels thing. Pretty sure no one here buys into that nonsense. We dismissed it for lack of evidence, generally.Steersman wrote:Would you believe …?Rystefn wrote:I see no evidence whatsoever that "we all" accept anything of the sort. I'd wager a great deal of money that you'll find many people who reject the idea of mind-brain duality outright, and more than a few that reject the idea of free will as well. Try again.Steersman wrote:But while that certainly seems like it generally holds quite a bit of water, it also seems that one can quite reasonably argue that we all accept many things without proof that no level of proof is apparently sufficient to dismiss – free will and that “mind†is something more than just “brainâ€, for examples.
Sorry – I should have been clearer; I wasn’t arguing that we all accept without proof, for example, the free-will hypothesis, only that we all accept different things without proof, more or less by necessity. However, somewhat in the nature of the beast, it seems that even the contrary hypothesis – that there is no free-will – is still something that many other people accept as an article of faith which still has no conclusive proof.
As for more prosaic examples, those might be a little harder to come by, although the fact that some 60% of Americans supposedly believe that “angels and demons are active in the world†might be a good start. However, my impression is still that many of our day-to-day beliefs could qualify as, in Einstein’s words, little more than “stubbornly persistent illusions†that we cling to with some tenacity yet without conclusive proof.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Hear. Hear.Reap wrote:If no one has done so already I would like to show my respect to Justin Vacula for the work he did today. It is a great example of someone who not only pecks away at his keyboard but actually steps away from that keyboard to engage in activism that has an effect on his community, all the people in it, (whether they have internet access or not) and reality. Despite being labeled by people who have no real knowledge of his character as a bad example of atheism and a generally unlikable fellow he did let it get him down. Justin proved today that those people can babble all they wish and claim petty hollow victories to their little black-hearted desire, it does not intimidate him. Justin Vacula will not allow those simplistic socially retarded miscreants lessen his ability to be effective while not being a bitch. When he sees a battle that needs to be fought he gladly rides to the frontline ready to do battle and win! Let those pathetic lurkers stay safe and sound in their homes as if nestled to their mothers bosom feeding on her teat. Children have no place in a real fight anyway. Leave that fight to people like Justin Vacula and screw you Stephanie Zvan.
Great work Justin
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Yay. Two weeks of summer solstice holidays. Starting now.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
JackRayner wrote:I don't condone crap, and I reject the idea that I have any responsibility for prostitution being kept illegal, or for some serial killer going after them because they've internalized whatever value system, or even just some automatic reaction, that causes them to see prostitutes as worthy of death. ….Steersman wrote: Sorry, should have provided a link and a quote earlier:The homicide rate for female prostitutes was estimated to be 204 per 100,000,[2] which is considerably higher than that for the next riskiest occupations in the United States during a similar period (4 per 100,000 for female liquor store workers and 29 per 100,000 for male taxicab drivers).
As for who is doing the killing and what their motivations are, that seems to be quite a bit more difficult to determine than just the number of them. But the article indicates that they seem to be “favoured†by serial murderers, one of whom – Gary Ridgway, the Green River Killer – said in a documentary I remember seeing that he figured he was doing society a favour by killing them. Raises some interesting questions – some sticky wickets, actually – as to how much society is culpable in those crimes.I’m reminded of, although I don’t have the details handy at the moment, that just after the end of the second world war a whole bunch of the townspeople in places like Belsen and Auschwitz were marched through the concentration camps to show them what they had been part of or had in effect condoned.
I do what I can. I spread awareness among the people that I know on things that I think are problematic and vote against shitty laws. Unless it is cause by my order or by my own hand, no one's death is on me.
Sorry if you got the impression that I was holding you personally and solely responsible for those deaths as your rather draconian linked video would suggest. What I was trying to suggest with my somewhat rhetorical question “as to how much society is culpable in those crimes†was that we are all of us guilty or responsible to some extent for them – the same way we are all guilty for those deaths in Newtown and Aurora and Montreal. And for global warming and, apparently, for the deaths of some ten to twenty thousand kids every day.
How much any of us can do in any case is moot, but it seems that none of those problems can be solved until more of us take some responsibility for them which is, of course, easier said than done. But, as you suggest, raising people’s consciousness, their awareness, of the problems is a good start, although an important next step is to understand their nature and ramifications – riding madly off in all directions tends to be counterproductive. Along which line you might be interested in this video which suggests a broader shouldering of the blame and imposition of responsibility.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Reap wrote:It seems to me you are not quite correct despite your declaration- Falun Gong differs from Buddhism in its definition of the term "karma," in that it is taken not as a process of award and punishment, but as an exclusively negative term.sacha wrote: It is the only definition.it is about cause and effect of morality, as if it is a law of the universe.The modern view of karma, devoid of any spiritual exigencies, obviates the need for an acceptance of reincarnation in Judeochristian societies and attempts to portray karma as a universal psychological phenomenon which behaves predictably, like other physical forces such as gravity.
I'll tell them you won't allow a differing definition, that always works. If it doesn't I'll try the "If I say so it must be true" approach. I would prefer not to squabble over something that is at least debatable unless you insist.
Falun Gong:
It's still cause and effect of morality as if it's a Newtonian law, the fact that they do not acknowledge "good" as being a part of it, is irrelevant."A person has done bad things over his many lifetimes, and for people this results in misfortune, or for cultivators it's karmic obstacles, so there's birth, aging, sickness, and death. This is ordinary karma"
You mean like the word atheism? One can declare that it means anything they want it to mean, which does not change the fact that it is simply an absence of belief in gods.Reap wrote:I'll tell them you won't allow a differing definition, that always works... I would prefer not to squabble over something that is at least debatable unless you insist.
I'm not arguing just to argue. It is an ancient Indian religious concept that I find to be insidious, because it blames the innocent (if not in this life, than in a past life).
Karma = cause and effect of morality as universal law.
I still have not seen any evidence to the contrary, although there are some who are changing the core concept to fit their definition.
I don't understand why a sceptic would want to associate something based in reality with an ancient concept of woo.
It simply gives the word credibility, even if the incorrect "western" translation was an accepted definition.
-
- .
- Posts: 143
- Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 6:44 pm
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Good to see Justin Vacula get a mention at the friendly atheist for you know, actually engaging in some secular activism. That makes two pitters recently mentioned there, Abbie being the first. And no idiot comments from the FTB crowd this time either! Good job guys.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
one final Falun Gong description of the word, since that is what you chose to prove me incorrect:Reap wrote:
It seems to me you are not quite correct despite your declaration- Falun Gong differs from Buddhism in its definition of the term "karma," in that it is taken not as a process of award and punishment, but as an exclusively negative term.
This is a negative, black substance that accumulates in other dimensions lifetime after lifetime, by doing bad deeds and thinking bad thoughts. Falun Gong states that karma is the reason for suffering,
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Ok, you alone of all the people in the world have absolutely no beliefs whatsoever that you hold without proof. But you might want to consider this quote from Norbert Wiener, one of the progenitors of the science of cybernetics:Rystefn wrote:You're still wrong. Some of us look into those things and try to figure out if they're true, and some of us shrug our shoulders and say, "fuck it." Except for the angels thing. Pretty sure no one here buys into that nonsense. We dismissed it for lack of evidence, generally.Steersman wrote:Would you believe …?Rystefn wrote: Steersman said: But while that certainly seems like it generally holds quite a bit of water, it also seems that one can quite reasonably argue that we all accept many things without proof that no level of proof is apparently sufficient to dismiss – free will and that “mind†is something more than just “brainâ€, for examples.
I see no evidence whatsoever that "we all" accept anything of the sort. I'd wager a great deal of money that you'll find many people who reject the idea of mind-brain duality outright, and more than a few that reject the idea of free will as well. Try again.
Sorry – I should have been clearer; I wasn’t arguing that we all accept without proof, for example, the free-will hypothesis, only that we all accept different things without proof, more or less by necessity. However, somewhat in the nature of the beast, it seems that even the contrary hypothesis – that there is no free-will – is still something that many other people accept as an article of faith which still has no conclusive proof.
As for more prosaic examples, those might be a little harder to come by, although the fact that some 60% of Americans supposedly believe that “angels and demons are active in the world†might be a good start. However, my impression is still that many of our day-to-day beliefs could qualify as, in Einstein’s words, little more than “stubbornly persistent illusions†that we cling to with some tenacity yet without conclusive proof.
Seems that one has to start from some assumptions, even in science, and assumptions are, by definition (4), those claims that one accepts without proof, i.e., on faith. And if in fact that argument is true then it makes any philosophies or systems of belief or action based on science equally suspect.I have said that science is impossible without faith. By this I do not mean that the faith on which science depends is religious in nature or involves the acceptance of any of the dogmas of the ordinary religious creeds, yet without faith that nature is subject to law there can be no science. No amount of demonstration can ever prove that nature is subject to law. [The Human Use of Human Beings; pg 193]
Further, you might want to take a look at the article on conventional wisdom which argues this:
Conventional wisdom is the body of ideas or explanations generally accepted as true by the public or by experts in a field. Such ideas or explanations, though widely held, are unexamined. Unqualified societal discourse preserves the status quo.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
A functional assumption is not the same as a belief. More to the point, we aren't talking about proof, we're talking about evidence, and the fact that science works is pretty strong evidence that it's founding assumption are, if not true, close e-fucking-nough.Steersman wrote:Ok, you alone of all the people in the world have absolutely no beliefs whatsoever that you hold without proof. But you might want to consider this quote from Norbert Wiener, one of the progenitors of the science of cybernetics:
Seems that one has to start from some assumptions, even in science, and assumptions are, by definition (4), those claims that one accepts without proof, i.e., on faith. And if in fact that argument is true then it makes any philosophies or systems of belief or action based on science equally suspect.I have said that science is impossible without faith. By this I do not mean that the faith on which science depends is religious in nature or involves the acceptance of any of the dogmas of the ordinary religious creeds, yet without faith that nature is subject to law there can be no science. No amount of demonstration can ever prove that nature is subject to law. [The Human Use of Human Beings; pg 193]
That's nice. Do "we all" lean on conventional wisdom? No. We don't. Feel free to give it another try, though.Steersman wrote:Further, you might want to take a look at the article on conventional wisdom which argues this:
Conventional wisdom is the body of ideas or explanations generally accepted as true by the public or by experts in a field. Such ideas or explanations, though widely held, are unexamined. Unqualified societal discourse preserves the status quo.
-
- .
- Posts: 5859
- Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:34 pm
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
I see Greta has turned up on Svans thread to add a contribution to the pyre.
Was there an earlier version of Welsh's blog post because I can't find the second, and most damaging quote that she seems to have found.
http://i.imgur.com/qzOMo.jpg
It can't be that she simply made it up herself and is lying through her teeth about Welsh saying that Watson is a "slut" who deserves "to be raped to death"?
Can it? :think:
Was there an earlier version of Welsh's blog post because I can't find the second, and most damaging quote that she seems to have found.
http://i.imgur.com/qzOMo.jpg
It can't be that she simply made it up herself and is lying through her teeth about Welsh saying that Watson is a "slut" who deserves "to be raped to death"?
Can it? :think:
-
- .
- Posts: 311
- Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 9:17 am
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Because language can be fluid and sometimes it's easier to fit a word in which everyone will understand to represent a rather clunky concept?sacha wrote:
You mean like the word atheism? One can declare that it means anything they want it to mean, which does not change the fact that it is simply an absence of belief in gods.
I'm not arguing just to argue. It is an ancient Indian religious concept that I find to be insidious, because it blames the innocent (if not in this life, than in a past life).
Karma = cause and effect of morality as universal law.
I still have not seen any evidence to the contrary, although there are some who are changing the core concept to fit their definition.
I don't understand why a sceptic would want to associate something based in reality with an ancient concept of woo.
It simply gives the word credibility, even if the incorrect "western" translation was an accepted definition.
Is there any other word or phrase you can think of that gets across the idea that what you do in life and how you treat people has a way of affecting how you are treated? What goes around, comes around?
It's like using the word purgatory to describe some event in your life where you had to wait a ridiculous amount of time to get or do something.
-"Hey, John, how's that proposal coming?"
-"It's in purgatory, you know, because Hell is other people."
-"Ah. That sucks, dude."
It's just a symbol to efficiently get a point across.
You could extricate the dictionary of any words that have anything to do with woo or religion, but the English language would be much poorer for it.
-
- .
- Posts: 4024
- Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 3:44 pm
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Guess who still insists the Slymepit "doxxed" him?
Our good old pal, Brownian (or Anthony K as he's called now)
You used the name "Brownian" on multiple occasions, so anyone would able to find it in seconds! Seconds! You literally would just have to make a Google search for "Brownian" and "Pharyngula". We have PROOF, you fucking idiot! Facebook, Twitter, ATHEIST FUCKING NEXUS! Linking back to Pharyngula, mentioning Pharyngula by name several times. You would have to be retarded to NOT make the connection.
Wait, I'm sorry. "Retarded" is one of the bad words you don't like. Let me rephrase: you would have to be RETARDED to not make the connection.
Same thing when Surly broadcasted her FULL ADRESS applied to her BUSINESS. Who does that? To prevent stalkers and unsavory types from finding me, I'll just paint a nice shining sponsored by Surlyramics TARGET on my back. That'll keep them at bay! Pardon if I won't hide the atomic facepalm I'm now exhibiting. Not such a good idea to channel the queen of hurt fee fees, now is it, Brownian, old buddy, old pal?
Our good old pal, Brownian (or Anthony K as he's called now)
In response to this from Jay,I’m so glad to read that Jay, because I feel the same way. Slymepit fuckers have lied about and doxxed me.
As far as I’m concerned, you ass-sucking fuckers get everything coming your way.
Brownian, Anthony, whatever, let me make this absolutely clear: NOBODY "DOXXED" YOU. Nobody! If someone should have that "honour" (and we know someone needs to be responsible), it would be yourself, you fucking dumb shit, for broadcasting your real name on EVERY SINGLE SOCIAL NETWORK YOU SUBSCRIBED TO!You may dislike what welch does, but his attack is logical: it’s called, disagreeing with your assumptions and refusing to play your game.
Whether it’s dems/repubs, evolution/creationist, atheist/religious, or now Atheism+/Atheists, it’s been shown over and over the two sides cannot have fair intellectual arguments on the net.
The instant one of you disemvowel, moderate, delete, alter, ban what others have to say, well, you deserve all the heap of shit people can heap on you.
And you make it worse, with the encouragement of your commenters to pile on.
And that’s long after you folks couldn’t even argue with intellectual honesty or acknowledge truthfully what others have to say or what their positions are.
So, your cries of victimhood are like what? What’s the metaphor Stephanie? Oh something like tears I drink from.
You used the name "Brownian" on multiple occasions, so anyone would able to find it in seconds! Seconds! You literally would just have to make a Google search for "Brownian" and "Pharyngula". We have PROOF, you fucking idiot! Facebook, Twitter, ATHEIST FUCKING NEXUS! Linking back to Pharyngula, mentioning Pharyngula by name several times. You would have to be retarded to NOT make the connection.
Wait, I'm sorry. "Retarded" is one of the bad words you don't like. Let me rephrase: you would have to be RETARDED to not make the connection.
Same thing when Surly broadcasted her FULL ADRESS applied to her BUSINESS. Who does that? To prevent stalkers and unsavory types from finding me, I'll just paint a nice shining sponsored by Surlyramics TARGET on my back. That'll keep them at bay! Pardon if I won't hide the atomic facepalm I'm now exhibiting. Not such a good idea to channel the queen of hurt fee fees, now is it, Brownian, old buddy, old pal?
-
- .
- Posts: 311
- Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 9:17 am
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
That kid doesn't have the sense evolution gave a sack of hammers.Pitchguest wrote:Guess who still insists the Slymepit "doxxed" him?
Our good old pal, Brownian (or Anthony K as he's called now)
I’m so glad to read that Jay, because I feel the same way. Slymepit fuckers have lied about and doxxed me.
As far as I’m concerned, you ass-sucking fuckers get everything coming your way.
-
- That's All Folks
- Posts: 11875
- Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:56 pm
- Location: Nice, France
- Contact:
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
No end of the world in sight right now.
I'll report back after 11:21 GMT.
Hopefully...
I'll report back after 11:21 GMT.
Hopefully...
-
- .
- Posts: 5357
- Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 12:04 am
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Renee, have just caught up over the last 6 pages, sorry to hear about this lymphoma scare, hopefully it's just a false alarm, indeed a needle biopsy typically does not provide enough info for diagnosis (the pathologists like to see the "architecture" of the lymph node, though these days flow cytometry can also provide useful info). There's a very wide range of behavior of lymphomas. The aggressive ones (high-grade) are scary & dangerous but can respond very well to treatment. The slow-growing ones (low-grade) can mosey along for years or even decades but (typically) can't be cured. I hope you can get more information soon, though the holiday may put a bit of a wrench into that.
-
- .
- Posts: 4024
- Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 3:44 pm
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Going to bed now, insomnia sucks. Hopefully the world won't end until I've had a good six hours sleep, at least. Ta.
-
- .
- Posts: 5357
- Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 12:04 am
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Yeah, but free will and mind-body dualism are pretty convincing illusions. YMMV, of course.sacha wrote:9CqbO_5FKRcWild Zontargs wrote:I'm prepared to serve as a counter-example if necessary.JackRayner wrote:Just so that I don't jump in before verifying: Did you just say that we all accept "free will" and that the "mind" is something more than just the brain?
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
OH CRAP! IS there a way to delete emails AFTER you've sent them?BarnOwl wrote:Quite relieved that the Mayan Apocalypse failed, according to Australia and New Zealand. I just joined a running club two weeks ago, and I'd hate to think that all those brutal workouts went to waste.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
I just googled brownian and pharyngula. His full name does come up as the first result but he seems to have deleted it... if he's reading the 'pit and wants to avoid it coming up, you could try to ask google to reindex that page? Hope that helps...
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
If you're wondering, the world still hasn't ended.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Roughly T - 3 hours as of this posting until 9:11 pm Australian EST. So far, no apocalyptic happenings to report. Slightly disappointed that I won't get to go all mad max and wander the wastes.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Quite right – even “stubbornly persistent onesâ€.Skep tickle wrote:Yeah, but free will and mind-body dualism are pretty convincing illusions. YMMV, of course.sacha wrote:9CqbO_5FKRcWild Zontargs wrote: JackRayner said: Just so that I don't jump in before verifying: Did you just say that we all accept "free will" and that the "mind" is something more than just the brain?
I'm prepared to serve as a counter-example if necessary.
Taking due cognizance of sacha’s recent reposting of an amusing video on the question, one can’t help but think that the phenomenon of emergence tends to support the argument for dualism. Although, as with other related discussions, the waters tend to get muddied by questions as to what is meant by various terms.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Not an article of faith, a reasoned position justifiable by argumentation if requested.Steersman wrote: it seems to be some “Slyme Pit dogmaâ€, an article of faith, that, as Phil is fond of quoting Hitchens on, “What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof.â€
Free will is an illusion caused by consciousness emerging from concious processing.But while that certainly seems like it generally holds quite a bit of water, it also seems that one can quite reasonably argue that we all accept many things without proof that no level of proof is apparently sufficient to dismiss – free will and that “mind†is something more than just “brainâ€, for examples.
Mind is just a name for the process the brain does, like bending is a name for the process that knees do. No duality just names of different aspects.
Please do try again.
-
- .
- Posts: 5357
- Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 12:04 am
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Just got the book "Assholes: A Theory" by Aaron James (avaiable from Amazon, see Lsuoma's link at the bottom of the page). It looked interesting and perhaps relevant to the "skeptic schism", & besides who can resist a title like that. On initial skim of a couple of sections I'm seeing some things I don't agree with (coincidentally, one is his claims about free will, however he may be using "free will" simply to mean control over some aspect of one's behavior).
This caught my eye, in Chapter 1:
This caught my eye, in Chapter 1:
He claims most assholes are men (with women more often playing "bitch", see below) and he discusses this further in Chapter 4, "Gender, Nature, and Blame". I didn't expect to see in this book the term "intersectionality" and the claim that "deep" cultural gender roles >> biological factors, but there they are. But for our purposes, here's a couple lines from that chapter that caught my eye, on the difference between "bitch" and "asshole" as he's using the terms (neither is specific to one gender):Our theory thus has 3 main parts. In interpersonal or cooperative relations, the asshole:
- allow himself to enjoy special advantages and does so systematically;
- does this out of an entrenched sense of entitlement; and
- is immunized by his sense of entitlement against the complaints of other people.
The bitch betrays you behind your back. The asshole fails to recognize you to your face.
One advantage to the asshole is that his ugly conduct takes place out in the open. This makes him easier to avoid. The bitch presents uncertainty, because hidden motives are harder to discern.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Apologies, I'd read you as talking about "on faith" not "without proof". Ofcourse we accept things without proof, outside of logic and mathematics there is no proof. Only evidence and argument, and the difference between accepting on that basis and faith, is that you accept tentatively only to the degree that the arguments and evidence support the position.Steersman wrote:Sorry – I should have been clearer; I wasn’t arguing that we all accept without proof, for example, the free-will hypothesis, only that we all accept different things without proof, more or less by necessity. However, somewhat in the nature of the beast, it seems that even the contrary hypothesis – that there is no free-will – is still something that many other people accept as an article of faith which still has no conclusive proof.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
No, Assumptions are claims which are taken to be true for the sake of argument and later tested. The assumptions I make as a basis are:Steersman wrote:Seems that one has to start from some assumptions, even in science, and assumptions are, by definition (4), those claims that one accepts without proof, i.e., on faith.
1) There is a reality outside of my experience
2) That reality in some form causes my experience
Once you have those two, the rest of my beliefs are based on evidence and argument from there and my experience. As it turns out, those assumptions seem to be holding good, they have yet to cause a contradiction, but it also turns out that holding the contrary to either of those assumptions is undetectably different in terms of experience, but practically useless. They are functional assumptions.
It is impossible to hold tentative beliefs or acquire knowledge without some base assumption, it's not suspect to assume something exists nor to assume it causes your experience.And if in fact that argument is true then it makes any philosophies or systems of belief or action based on science equally suspect.
Except that people challenge the conventional wisdom all the time, it's encouraged.Conventional wisdom is the body of ideas or explanations generally accepted as true by the public or by experts in a field. Such ideas or explanations, though widely held, are unexamined. Unqualified societal discourse preserves the status quo.
You're digging a hole here steers.
-
- .
- Posts: 5357
- Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 12:04 am
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
So far, in "Assholes", the author has given Ann Coulter and Richard Dawkins as examples of assholes, also basically the entire Bush administration and much of France. :lol: (okay, really just a couple of French politicians.)
The index is full of names, many of whom seem to be included as examples of assholery. (Jesus and God have multiple pages listed in the index but on checking the first couple, it doesn't look like he's even thinking about calling them assholes. Missed opportunity, I'd say.)
Odd thing, I don't see any of the FtB/Skepchick/A+ crowd listed. Presumably simply an oversight that James can correct in his 2nd edition.
Nor, in his chapter on "Newer Asshole Styles", does he mention "New Media Douchebags". Seems like that would be a useful addition.
The index is full of names, many of whom seem to be included as examples of assholery. (Jesus and God have multiple pages listed in the index but on checking the first couple, it doesn't look like he's even thinking about calling them assholes. Missed opportunity, I'd say.)
Odd thing, I don't see any of the FtB/Skepchick/A+ crowd listed. Presumably simply an oversight that James can correct in his 2nd edition.
Nor, in his chapter on "Newer Asshole Styles", does he mention "New Media Douchebags". Seems like that would be a useful addition.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Today I had the realisation that men talk to me all the time in the street and lifts.
I talk back to them.
Weird.
I talk back to them.
Weird.
-
- That's All Folks
- Posts: 11875
- Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:56 pm
- Location: Nice, France
- Contact:
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
How surprising...Skep tickle wrote:and much of France. :lol: (okay, really just a couple of French politicians.)
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Have to say, I'm getting a lot less strangers starting hostile conversations now that I've switched from a book to a kindle. It feels sort of like my new technology terrifies their tiny little minds. MUAHAHAHAHAHA!
Also, most of them, if you go "sorry buddy, I'm kinda busy right now" or "I don't mean to be rude but I need some space right now ok?" will just shut the fuck up and leave you alone. Those fainting couch resident professional victims try and make all of them out to be the ranting raving dicks that just plough on despite being told to stop. Which exist, but not the majority.
I'd love to live in their heads for a day or two, to see what the crazy feels like.
Also, most of them, if you go "sorry buddy, I'm kinda busy right now" or "I don't mean to be rude but I need some space right now ok?" will just shut the fuck up and leave you alone. Those fainting couch resident professional victims try and make all of them out to be the ranting raving dicks that just plough on despite being told to stop. Which exist, but not the majority.
I'd love to live in their heads for a day or two, to see what the crazy feels like.
-
- That's All Folks
- Posts: 11875
- Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:56 pm
- Location: Nice, France
- Contact:
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
[youtube]BwkdGr9JYmE[/youtube]SPACKlick wrote:Have to say, I'm getting a lot less strangers starting hostile conversations now that I've switched from a book to a kindle. It feels sort of like my new technology terrifies their tiny little minds. MUAHAHAHAHAHA!
Also, most of them, if you go "sorry buddy, I'm kinda busy right now" or "I don't mean to be rude but I need some space right now ok?" will just shut the fuck up and leave you alone. Those fainting couch resident professional victims try and make all of them out to be the ranting raving dicks that just plough on despite being told to stop. Which exist, but not the majority.
I'd love to live in their heads for a day or two, to see what the crazy feels like.
Rape is never funny
[youtube]yh1RkRxnAOs[/youtube]
-
- That's All Folks
- Posts: 11875
- Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:56 pm
- Location: Nice, France
- Contact:
Re: Rape is never funny
10:15 AM GMT+1rayshul wrote:[youtube]yh1RkRxnAOs[/youtube]
No end of the world.
Needs a new screen, though. Coffee stains look nasty.
-
- .
- Posts: 1111
- Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2012 1:08 am
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
In the spirit of the day…
[youtube]FIY41LrvMFQ[/youtube]
[youtube]FIY41LrvMFQ[/youtube]
-
- That's All Folks
- Posts: 11875
- Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:56 pm
- Location: Nice, France
- Contact:
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Bullshit, they always forget Ronnie Soak.TedDahlberg wrote:In the spirit of the day…
FIY41LrvMFQ
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Ok, how about the following: :-)SPACKlick wrote:Free will is an illusion caused by consciousness emerging from concious processing.Steersman wrote:But while that certainly seems like it generally holds quite a bit of water, it also seems that one can quite reasonably argue that we all accept many things without proof that no level of proof is apparently sufficient to dismiss – free will and that “mind†is something more than just “brainâ€, for examples.
Mind is just a name for the process the brain does, like bending is a name for the process that knees do. No duality just names of different aspects.
Please do try again.
I’m more or less stumbling about in the dark on the question, but it seems to me that the whole argument about emergence is that, in simplest terms, the whole – “mind†– can be quite a bit more than the sum of the parts – “brainâ€. It would appear certain that the mind is a process in the brain, but the argument seems to be that the mind is something over and above the process itself.
Supposedly a very good example of that is the phonon; you might be interested in this article (the following link seems a little erratic, doesn't always work) on the topic which argues:
That article is referenced and discussed in some detail in a discussion that the biologist/philosopher Massimo Pigliucci was part of recently.For example, when a large number of atoms condense into a crystal, the phonon, the elementary quantum of sound, becomes a perfectly legitimate particle at low energy scales. It propagates freely, does not decay, interacts by simple rules that can be verified experimentally, carries momentum and energy relative to wavelength and frequency, and mediates the attractive interaction responsible for conventional superconductivity.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
BAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHADick Strawkins wrote:I see Greta has turned up on Svans thread to add a contribution to the pyre.
Was there an earlier version of Welsh's blog post because I can't find the second, and most damaging quote that she seems to have found.
http://i.imgur.com/qzOMo.jpg
It can't be that she simply made it up herself and is lying through her teeth about Welsh saying that Watson is a "slut" who deserves "to be raped to death"?
Can it? :think:
Oh Greta, bless your heart. There is no faster way to make an NMD cry than point out how they lov to create nontroversies to get hit counts.
She's so precious. I wonder of she ever pulls a muscle patting herself on the back.
-
- That's All Folks
- Posts: 11875
- Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:56 pm
- Location: Nice, France
- Contact:
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
kumbaya my Steers, kumbaya...
I also have nice crystals to sell.
I also have nice crystals to sell.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
John Brown wrote:That kid doesn't have the sense evolution gave a sack of hammers.Pitchguest wrote:Guess who still insists the Slymepit "doxxed" him?
Our good old pal, Brownian (or Anthony K as he's called now)
I’m so glad to read that Jay, because I feel the same way. Slymepit fuckers have lied about and doxxed me.
As far as I’m concerned, you ass-sucking fuckers get everything coming your way.
How to make NMDs flip the fuck out:
1) point out how they manufacture bullshit to get attention.
2) see 1)
And as my AMB cohort and I have discussed, damn but atheists/skeptics are some thin-skinned motherfuckers.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Those crystals actually have some real physics and philosophy behind them – you might want to consider following a link or two before making up your mind – unless it’s totally closed off ….Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:kumbaya my Steers, kumbaya...
I also have nice crystals to sell.
-
- That's All Folks
- Posts: 11875
- Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:56 pm
- Location: Nice, France
- Contact:
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
GO HOME STEERS! YOU'RE DRUNK!Steersman wrote:Those crystals actually have some real physics and philosophy behind them – you might want to consider following a link or two before making up your mind – unless it’s totally closed off ….Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:kumbaya my Steers, kumbaya...
I also have nice crystals to sell.
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Certainly not on alcohol ....Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:GO HOME STEERS! YOU'RE DRUNK!Steersman wrote:Those crystals actually have some real physics and philosophy behind them – you might want to consider following a link or two before making up your mind – unless it’s totally closed off ….Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:kumbaya my Steers, kumbaya...
I also have nice crystals to sell.
-
- That's All Folks
- Posts: 11875
- Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:56 pm
- Location: Nice, France
- Contact:
Re: Periodic Table of Swearing
Probably on crystals, then.Steersman wrote:
Certainly not on alcohol ....