Select Page
Poker Forum
Over 1,291,000 Posts!
Poker ForumFTR Community

Randomness thread, part two.

Page 420 of 420 FirstFirst ... 320370410418419420
Results 31,426 to 31,470 of 31470
  1. #31426
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Like, imagine saying to someone "I find that word you use to describe your culture to be offensive and you shouldn't use it in my country".

    Imagine being that fucking dumb.

    It's a tossup between which it's more of: arrogant or dumb, but yes that's pretty dumb.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission...then we should explode him.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  2. #31427
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    10,316
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    SMH. Poor thing.
    It's pretty rough for her, what with being not an American and all, and now this embarrassing thing about the (altogether wholesome) way she loves herself.
    Cancelled.


    Seriously, though. Good for her. Keep on rockin' with loving yourself and your culture.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  3. #31428
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    It's a tossup between which it's more of: arrogant or dumb, but yes that's pretty dumb.
    I had to think about whether it's arrogance or not, I think it is. I mean, generally arrogance is thinking (or knowing) you're better than someone else at something, and behaving in a way such to demean those you view as below you.

    But it can also be blindly thinking that your worldview is correct and that everyone else who doesn't share that worldview is wrong, and expecting others to fall into line with your worldview. I'd call that arrogance too.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  4. #31429
    Merry Christmas! Have the only Christmas song I like. The guitar solo is wonderful.

    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  5. #31430
    Merry Christmas, mofos! May you find a present you enjoy as much as Chili enjoys this pond.

    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission...then we should explode him.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  6. #31431
    What, you mean awesome for around a minute before getting cold and bored? Just give me an ice cream.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  7. #31432
    Love you too mate.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission...then we should explode him.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  8. #31433
    Merry Christmas everybody.

    I've been debating the top 5 Christmas movies today. Here are mine in no particular order:

    Elf
    Muppet Christmas Carol
    Home Alone
    Die Hard (yeah, I know)
    Planes, Trains and Automobiles (technically Thanksgiving)
  9. #31434
    Here's my top 5 Christmas films

    1. Superman 2
    2. Die Hard
    3.
    4.
    5.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  10. #31435
    And my top 5 Christmas songs

    1. Mike Oldfield - In Dulci Jubilo
    2. Pretenders - 2000 miles (nearly forgot this existed)
    3.
    4.
    5.
    Last edited by OngBonga; 12-24-2023 at 10:08 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  11. #31436
    I thought someone had brought up Baldur's Gate 3 here but can't find the post. Have to say I'm quite enjoying the game though, very rich and detailed, and the graphics are amazing.

    Even if I accidentally put on some armor that I couldn't use, sold my old armor, and now have to take off the new armor and run around in my undies so I can cast spells again. Oops.

    Bonus: I'm well on the road to banging Shadowheart. And I already banged Lae'zel. She tried some "it's time to submit," attitude on me but I wasn't having it. Showed her who's the man.
    Last edited by Poopadoop; 01-04-2024 at 02:52 PM.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission...then we should explode him.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  12. #31437
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    10,316
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    BG3 is absolutely amazing. I've completed it twice and was halfway through a Dark Urge run when my vacation started.
    I'm looking forward to getting back into it.

    There's so much that changes between each play through. Sure, the basic story is the same, but what your character can do or what you think to try makes a big difference. Who you save may come back later as a friend, and such.

    The armor thing: Gale is a human, so gets to wear more armor than most wizards. It can be confusing when you make a non-human wizard and you're like... but Gale wears it!?!

    Also, just go back and buy the armor you sold. All the vendors in Acts 1 and 2 will be there, assuming you didn't let them / make them die.

    The only way to increase reputation with vendors (AFAIK) is to give them free stuff. You can pick one with a decent amount of money to pump up and get better prices to buy and sell. Damon is in all 3 acts as long as he doesn't die in Act 2.


    There are any% sex speed runs to bang Lae'zel. The times are truly shockingly fast.

    Shadowheart is a decent romance. Lae'zel is best long-term, IMO. The way she softens up is the best character arc, I mean.
    Astarion doesn't like the goody-two-shoes hero stuff, and he never liked me until the Dark Urge run. I giggled when he called me his "overly stabby friend."
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  13. #31438
    This is actually pretty funny.

    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission...then we should explode him.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  14. #31439
    ^^ For context, if you haven't seen Rick Beato before, the above is a spoof on the below series.

    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission...then we should explode him.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  15. #31440
    Checkmate, atheists.

    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission...then we should explode him.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  16. #31441
    It's generally better to identify as agnostic rather than atheist when engaging with a theist, because both theism and atheism are acts of faith, while agnosticism is basically like saying "I haven't got a fucking clue, piss off".
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  17. #31442
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    10,316
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Contemporary agnosticism, you mean.

    The original meaning of the word was "whether or not there is a God cannot be proven or known."
    Just as much an act of faith to assert something cannot be known.


    Which I'm not even sure if most people today mean 1 or the other.
    To simply say, "IDK," is one thing, but if in your mind, you believe that the person you're speaking to also doesn't know, despite their assertions otherwise... that's a totally different thing that leans toward the older definition.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  18. #31443
    CoccoBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,502
    Location
    Finding my game
    Haven't we talked about this. Atheism isn't belief in the non-existence, it's lack of belief in the existence.

    Theism = belief in the existence of a god or gods
    Atheism = lack of the aforementioned
    Agnosticism = dunno, both seem equally likely
    Our brains have just one scale, and we resize our experiences to fit.

  19. #31444
    CoccoBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,502
    Location
    Finding my game
    That video lives up to page 420 standards though.
    Our brains have just one scale, and we resize our experiences to fit.

  20. #31445
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    It's generally better to identify as agnostic rather than atheist when engaging with a theist, because both theism and atheism are acts of faith, while agnosticism is basically like saying "I haven't got a fucking clue, piss off".
    Agreed. The reason that arguing with them is pointless is that their beliefs aren't based on anything empirical, but rather they just trust what they've been told. There's no objective evidence for their belief, and in fact enough contradictions within it to make a rational person seriously question it, yet they still believe it. Evidence to them is irrelevant, and so the chain between evidence and belief is unnecessary.

    The psychology of this kind of thinking is interesting though. As a child we believe in Santa Claus because our parents say he exists and on xmas morning "he" has left us a present. But once we reach a certain age we realise it's impossible for a mortal man to deliver a billion presents to hundreds of million different homes all in one night, and eat hundreds of millions of milks and cookies, and so the evidence overwhelms our belief, and our belief changes.

    With Goddies, the myth is supernatural and so encompassing that it can be used to explain anything (as "God's will" or whatever), and as the mass of their social circle is of a similar mindset (God exists), they maintain that belief despite it being objectively rather unlikely. In fact, because God doesn't have to obey the laws of physics, one could argue that he is responsible for not only all the xmas gifts but everything else that happens. He's just that kick-ass of a character.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission...then we should explode him.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  21. #31446
    Quote Originally Posted by CoccoBill View Post
    Haven't we talked about this. Atheism isn't belief in the non-existence, it's lack of belief in the existence.

    Theism = belief in the existence of a god or gods
    Atheism = lack of the aforementioned
    Agnosticism = dunno, both seem equally likely
    Not sure about this. My understanding of the term 'atheism' is that they specifically believe there is not a god or gods. It's not the same as lacking a belief in God, it's believing that there is none. Maybe that's what you meant though and it just went past me.

    Surely there's a continuum of agnosticism though. I consider myself agnostic, but I'm closer to 99.9%/0.01% in the belief split that there is no god(s) than that there is. It's not a 50/50 tossup to me, but I just try not to be so arrogant as to think I know the answer for certain.

    This is another thing that makes people like Hitchens and Dawkins unpersuasive. They're both so utterly convinced that they're right that the instinctive reaction of the other side is to dig in their heels even harder. Surely they're both intelligent enough to realise this (though intellect and social intelligence aren't necessarily correlated, so there's that...*). But after a while they must realise their approach isn't working, so their goal obviously isn't to change anyone's belief system, but rather to show off how smart they are by being cunts to people who aren't as smart.


    * Fun fact, when I was studying at Oxford, a few of us were having a pint with one of the workshop techs who started complaining about how Dawkins kepts asking him to build some impossible kit. He was calling him "dum dum Dawkins." which I thought was pretty funny.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission...then we should explode him.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  22. #31447
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    10,316
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    One of my friends in high school was adamant that he was a Christian, even though I never once saw him pick up a Bible. He attended no regular sermons, or even irregular sermons. He was a borderline criminal teen like the rest of us.

    And yet, if you brought up anything Jesus related, he would suddenly get all snowflake and butthurt over any implication that his faith wasn't fact.

    *shrug*

    I don't get the religious thing. If someone feels like believing in religious things helps them have more patience or to otherwise be closer to their best self, then I'm fine with it. Whatever works. I just have no patience for people who use their faith as a justification for bad behavior / dehumanizing others / violence / etc.

    Also, I'm like... how many times in your life do you need to have something that was once only understood as religious phenomenon be explained better by scientific means before you start to think... you know... this science thing that I totally use all the time may also apply to things beyond what I normally apply it to.

    Faith literally means belief without proof. Which is fine. There's plenty of things I have faith in. But when a better solution comes along, and provides proof... then I don't need to have faith in that thing, anymore.

    But it also means that someone who's not interested in proof has a firm crutch to stand on when they decide to ignore proof.
    So there's that.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  23. #31448
    CoccoBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,502
    Location
    Finding my game
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    Not sure about this. My understanding of the term 'atheism' is that they specifically believe there is not a god or gods. It's not the same as lacking a belief in God, it's believing that there is none. Maybe that's what you meant though and it just went past me.
    Wikipedia to the rescue:
    Atheism, in the broadest sense, is an absence of belief in the existence of deities. Less broadly, atheism is a rejection of the belief that any deities exist. In an even narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities. Atheism is contrasted with theism, which in its most general form is the belief that at least one deity exists.

    Either of the first 2 work for me. Theists do tend to interpret it only in the latter sense to create a false equivalence.

    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    Surely there's a continuum of agnosticism though. I consider myself agnostic, but I'm closer to 99.9%/0.01% in the belief split that there is no god(s) than that there is. It's not a 50/50 tossup to me, but I just try not to be so arrogant as to think I know the answer for certain.
    I believe the standard response to this is that I have roughly identical odds also for Russel's teapot and Pastafarianism. I'd feel silly calling myself an agnostic about them. I think atheism works well here as well, all 3 share about the same level of existing real proof. Should I interpret your 0.01% so that if I list 10000 deities you'll believe in one of them? :P
    Our brains have just one scale, and we resize our experiences to fit.

  24. #31449
    Quote Originally Posted by mojo
    The original meaning of the word was "whether or not there is a God cannot be proven or known."
    Just as much an act of faith to assert something cannot be known.
    Interesting take on it but not sure it's accurate. Agnosticism is the opinion that the existence of God is either unknown or unknowable. The latter is an act of faith, but the former is a statement of fact.

    I interpret the words as such...

    theism - the belief in God, which seems uncontroversial.
    atheism - the belief that God does not exist, also uncontroversial.
    agnosticism - basically, "on the fence", usually rejecting organised religion but open to the idea that there might be more than we understand, possibly what we can ever understand.

    The agnostic is the most likely to be swayed by evidence or experience, one way or the other. It's the most scientific position of the three. Science itself is arguably an act of faith, since a "fact" is only what we observe repeatedly. Maybe God is fucking with us. When you use the term "scientific fact" you're assuming that there is no chance that God is fucking with us, hence, an act of faith. So if you're going to argue agnosticism is an act of faith (in all cases) then there are no facts other than our own existence, and even that might not be a physical existence because you cannot prove beyond doubt that we don't exist in a simulation.

    The other two positions are generally unmoveable, their beliefs are supported by stubborn faith, and are less likely to be swayed by experience or evidence.

    Quote Originally Posted by cocco
    Atheism isn't belief in the non-existence, it's lack of belief in the existence.
    You're going to have to explain how these are not the same thing. If I have a lack of belief in the existence of God, then I also have a belief in the non-existence of God. If I'm "on the fence" I'm not an atheist, I'm an agnostic.
    Last edited by OngBonga; 01-23-2024 at 05:26 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  25. #31450
    Quote Originally Posted by CoccoBill View Post
    Should I interpret your 0.01% so that if I list 10000 deities you'll believe in one of them? :P
    Haha. But no, because 1) that's not how probability works (or more accurately, how likelihood works, since probability is always summing to 1, whereas likelihood is relative probabilities); and 2) because no.

    If you lined up 10000 deities, I might find some more believable than others, but on average, I'd find each of them extremely unlikely.

    For example, I'd be more inclined to believe there's some supernatural being that started the universe and then just sat back and watched and doesn't really give a shit what happens, vs. a God who's both the creator and is omniponent, all-controlling, all-seeing, but lets people suffer. Because the former God just sounds indifferent whereas the latter God sounds like a cunt. But then, I don't have any evidence for either version, so that's just the small part of me talking that is irrational and ignores evidence, so it gets to choose what it wants to believe. Just like it believed some chick liked me in grade 7 when she didn't (ok, it might have happened since then too).

    I mean, even rational people believe irrational things. Gambler's fallacy is a perfect example of how common it is. I bet a lot of otherwise intelligent people hold the GF until the day it's explained to them why it's wrong.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission...then we should explode him.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  26. #31451
    CoccoBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,502
    Location
    Finding my game
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    You're going to have to explain how these are not the same thing. If I have a lack of belief in the existence of God, then I also have a belief in the non-existence of God. If I'm "on the fence" I'm not an atheist, I'm an agnostic.
    Picture a deity in your mind. If I now say I don't hold a belief in my mind that the thing you're picturing exists, we can probably agree on that? What I have is a lack of belief, since I don't even know what you're thinking of. Compare that to me saying that whatever you're thinking of definitely doesn't exist. That's the difference.
    Our brains have just one scale, and we resize our experiences to fit.

  27. #31452
    CoccoBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,502
    Location
    Finding my game
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    Haha. But no, because 1) that's not how probability works (or more accurately, how likelihood works, since probability is always summing to 1, whereas likelihood is relative probabilities)
    I know, but it was either that or the fact that your percentages don't add up, and I went with the less nitpicky one.
    Our brains have just one scale, and we resize our experiences to fit.

  28. #31453
    I guess I can see where you're coming from, but it's a very small grey area in an otherwise fairly black and white matter of atheism vs agnosticism.

    You have a lack of belief in my position merely because it hasn't been described to you, which is different to not believing something which has been described.

    The atheist isn't ignorant or uneducated, he's dismissing what other people believe, with knowledge of what the other person believes.

    If you're rejecting a position due to ignorance, while potentially being open to a position that you might become aware of in the future, you're agnostic, because you're accepting God might exist.

    It gets a bit messy because we have different cultural interpretations of God, and they are seen as rivalling each other, as different beliefs, especially by theists who belong to an organised religion, while the atheist and the agnostic are both more likely to see them fundamentally as different interpretations of the same belief. So it's easy to get mixed up between atheism and agnosticism when we look at organised religion in the world today, rather than merely the general belief in God or Gods.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  29. #31454
    I guess another way to look at it is thus...

    The atheist rejects any and all interpretations of God on the basis that he does not believe in a higher power, a creator. There is no God.

    The agnostic rejects organised religion and human interpretations of God while accepting that there might be some kind of higher power or creator, something we could reasonably call God. Or, at least, the belief that such a thing cannot ever be proven one way or the other, and as such does not commit to a position either way.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  30. #31455
    CoccoBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,502
    Location
    Finding my game
    Didn't mean that the position comes only from ignorance, just used it to try and illustrate the difference. It's all semantics anyway, and if I have to choose between a term that can also be described as "I believe there is no god", and another that can also mean "I kinda believe there is a god but not quite sure", I feel the former is overall more accurate.
    Our brains have just one scale, and we resize our experiences to fit.

  31. #31456
    Yeah fair enough, I'm more inclined to identify as the latter, but even if there exists something that can be called "God", for reasons poop stated, such a God is either nothing more than a creator with no conscious influence on continued existence, or a cunt.

    The problem people have is they tend to personify God. It's usually a human, but maybe it's an elephant with eight arms or whatever. It's nearly always a conscious entity that makes decisions, that observes and judges its own creations. And they always judge exclusively humans, you never hear of a God that sends evil dolphins to hell for raping and killing innocent infant dolphins. The cat doesn't go to hell for killing a bird for fun.

    Given God is usually identified as an all-powerful ruler of all existence, it's easy to get on board the atheism train. But when you are willing to interpret nature itself as some kind of higher power, you can quite easily slip into agnosticism. I mean, I can at least respect sun worshippers. The sun might not be a conscious all-powerful judge, but it certainly created all life on Earth, and continues to give us life. So while I'm not going to start worshipping the sun, I can at least appreciate it fulfils some definitions of what a God even is.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  32. #31457
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    10,316
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    I'd like to think that if cocco actually lined up 10,000 deities in front of me that I'd believe in all 10,000 deities lined up in front of me.

    Also, the number of questions I'd have for cocco would be at least 10,000.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  33. #31458
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    10,316
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by ongie
    Science itself is arguably an act of faith, since a "fact" is only what we observe repeatedly. Maybe God is fucking with us. When you use the term "scientific fact" you're assuming that there is no chance that God is fucking with us, hence, an act of faith.
    Science is an act of faith because believing what has happened is a predictor of what will happen is nonsense.
    Believing that the laws of physics are immutable in space and time is an act of faith.
    There are countless other acts of faith involving the frequent use of mathematics, a field rigorous enough to prove it is utterly, hopelessly incomplete.

    The part about "scientific fact" being somehow immutable is where I take issue with this statement.
    The history of science is a story of nerds proving each other wrong. It stands to reason that all we hold as "scientific fact" today will later be shown to be a crude approximation. Then later still, that refinement will also be shown to be a crude approximation.

    There's nothing about a scientific fact that is permanent. Quite the opposite.


    If you want a permanent fact, say something perfectly subjective about yourself.
    "I don't like raw tomatoes."
    That's a perfect fact. True as true gets.

    People have the weight of value on truthiness all backwards. Perfectly true statements can only be subjective; the best you can do objectively is to state an axiom.

    This is true because I can imagine a mathematical structure in which this is true. If you assume this is true, you'll have imagined the same mathematical structure, and we're besties.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  34. #31459
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    10,316
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    The sun might not be a conscious all-powerful judge, but it certainly created all life on Earth, and continues to give us life. So while I'm not going to start worshipping the sun, I can at least appreciate it fulfils some definitions of what a God even is.
    Just remember to avert your eyes. The Sun-God takes offense at being directly looked upon.
    Except during sunrise and sunset when they put on a good show.

    All hail the great source of low-entropy shizwaz!!
    Your deliverance of stuff we can increase the entropy of to do "stuff" is totes awesome!
    Huzzah!
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  35. #31460
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    10,316
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Agnosticism vs. Athiesm
    There's a difference between, "I'm not convinced you're right," and "You're wrong."
    A big difference, IMO.

    I guess both agnostics and athiests can drift into the latter, though.


    I tend to land on the side of
    Q) Do you believe in God?
    A) The short answer is no, and the long answer is yes.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  36. #31461
    Here's a stone cold fact. This guy is talking out of his arse.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68085304

    An American "scientist" is claiming that to make the perfect cup of tea, you should add salt.

    I think he should be fired on the spot. This is worse than a man of science being a flat earther.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  37. #31462
    btw, "I don't like raw tomatoes" isn't necessarily a fact. Have you tried sun dried tomatoes? I don't like raw tomato all that much either, but sun dried can be delicious.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  38. #31463
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    10,316
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    An American "scientist" is claiming that to make the perfect cup of tea, you should add salt.

    I think he should be fired on the spot. This is worse than a man of science being a flat earther.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  39. #31464
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    10,316
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    I don't follow football, so I don't know who Taylor Swift is, but he sounds fast.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  40. #31465
    Game was obviously rigged by the Deep State to embarrass Trump somehow.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission...then we should explode him.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  41. #31466
    CoccoBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,502
    Location
    Finding my game
    https://twitter.com/P_Kallioniemi/st...45157370712386

    I knew some stuff about Assange but have missed a lot of this. An interesting figure.
    Our brains have just one scale, and we resize our experiences to fit.

  42. #31467
    Oskar in a previous life.

    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission...then we should explode him.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  43. #31468
    oskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,907
    Location
    in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
    Quote Originally Posted by CoccoBill View Post
    https://twitter.com/P_Kallioniemi/st...45157370712386

    I knew some stuff about Assange but have missed a lot of this. An interesting figure.
    afik, nobody involved in the killing of the civilians and Reuters journalist and the subsequent cover up of the Collateral Murder videos was ever charged, but Julian Assange will likely die in prison for publishing it.
    Last edited by oskar; 02-27-2024 at 03:01 PM.
    The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
  44. #31469
    oskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,907
    Location
    in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
    She has dozens of these videos. Absolutely insane YT channel.
    The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
  45. #31470
    CoccoBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,502
    Location
    Finding my game
    Quote Originally Posted by oskar View Post
    afik, nobody involved in the killing of the civilians and Reuters journalist and the subsequent cover up of the Collateral Murder videos was ever charged, but Julian Assange will likely die in prison for publishing it.
    Yeah absolutely, says a lot about priorities and motives. From what I've gathered Assange is seemingly a douschebag, likely a Russian asset, but most definitely has done some important whistle-blowing. Would like to see the actual reports being addressed adequately and him getting a fair trial, but can't see either of those ever happening.
    Our brains have just one scale, and we resize our experiences to fit.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •