E=MC squared is a liberal plot

LobsterMobster wrote:

The Maddow/Beck thing isn't exactly surprising. It's Conservapedia. It doesn't claim to be balanced.

Of course. I think what's jarring to me is to see it so blatantly out there. I want to believe that The Onion is behind this, but I know that this is real because I too have heard discussions of the same tone. That whole tone of taking your subjectivity and finding the facts to pivot on to make it sound objective is repulsive. Here it's so blatant that it's comical and depressing all at once.

What's not surprising is that the founder of Conservapedia is none other than a son of Phyllis Schlafly, a well-known Republican activist of the last few decades. He's pretty well-educated, too. Another example of the Republicans moving to the fringes and trying to yank the country along with them.

Maybe we should draw a distinction between having a good education and having a lot of education.

My favorite quote from my philosophy professor is "Never mistake good logic for correct logic". It's amazing how many people will misuse logic unintentionally, and it's disturbing how many will misuse it intentionally...

Robear wrote:

My favorite quote from my philosophy professor is "Never mistake good logic for correct logic". It's amazing how many people will misuse logic unintentionally, and it's disturbing how many will misuse it intentionally...

I often wonder whether these guys, the smarter ones who orchestrate these shenanigans (also in Belgian politics/media) actually believe what they're saying. Or do they just love the power/money all the manipulating brings?

The younger Schlafly is a lawyer, and probably a good one. Given his family, I'd say he believes the ends justify the means. After all, he's working for God and country...

dejanzie wrote:
Robear wrote:

My favorite quote from my philosophy professor is "Never mistake good logic for correct logic". It's amazing how many people will misuse logic unintentionally, and it's disturbing how many will misuse it intentionally...

I often wonder whether these guys, the smarter ones who orchestrate these shenanigans (also in Belgian politics/media) actually believe what they're saying. Or do they just love the power/money all the manipulating brings?

I think it's somewhere in the middle. I think they genuinely believe what they say but have found their reasons for believing do not always convince others. Therefore, they work on new arguments that may or may not be honest. They know they're right and they think that convincing other people they're right is a morally good thing to do. The ends justify the means and all that.

The people who are in it just to manipulate people tend not to be the ones we see on TV and at rallies. The true believers are far more effective speakers. The manipulators are better organizers.

Robear wrote:

The younger Schlafly is a lawyer, and probably a good one. Given his family, I'd say he believes the ends justify the means. After all, he's working for God and country...

This and folks like the Westboro Baptist Church, don't you have to be smart to be a lawyer? Then again, never underestimate the lure of power I guess.

Robear wrote:

BTW, this area will see 17 year locusts again in 2013! That's the brood which hit in 1979 and 1996. I remember though that that was nowhere near the size of the 1970 brood, which hits again in 2021. That one had periods where you literally couldn't walk outside in some areas around Baltimore without crushing cicadas underfoot and feeling them fly into you. And the sound was incredibly loud, too.

Looking forward to 2021. (What's funny is that the current 17 year/13 year broods are less than 10,000 years old, as the Ice Age means that the US East Coast was not a conducive habitat. So those are actually indicative of evolution, not exclusive of it, since brood breeding is specific to locations, date of emergence and calls.)

Too bad the world will be ending in 2012!

This and folks like the Westboro Baptist Church, don't you have to be smart to be a lawyer? Then again, never underestimate the lure of power I guess.

Not really. A Poli Sci degree and about $100k will get you through a middling-to-good law school depending on GPA, LSAT and family connections.

LobsterMobster wrote:

Maybe we should draw a distinction between having a good education and having a lot of education.

This is my favorite thing you have written and is fantastically true.

SallyNasty wrote:
LobsterMobster wrote:

Maybe we should draw a distinction between having a good education and having a lot of education.

This is my favorite thing you have written and is fantastically true.

I'm good for one of those every now and then. Maybe I should start selling a box set?

LobsterMobster wrote:
SallyNasty wrote:
LobsterMobster wrote:

Maybe we should draw a distinction between having a good education and having a lot of education.

This is my favorite thing you have written and is fantastically true.

I'm good for one of those every now and then. Maybe I should start selling a box set? :D

Don't get ahead of yourself.

Shoal07 wrote:
LobsterMobster wrote:
SallyNasty wrote:
LobsterMobster wrote:

Maybe we should draw a distinction between having a good education and having a lot of education.

This is my favorite thing you have written and is fantastically true.

I'm good for one of those every now and then. Maybe I should start selling a box set? :D

Don't get ahead of yourself. ;)

Don't listen to him, it's a brilliant idea. First the regular box set and Special Edition (including limited edition of lobster's mom figurines), then the Director's Cut, then the Remastered Edition, then the 3D version.

1. LobsterMobster Quotes
2. Put it in a box
3. ?
4. Profit!

dejanzie wrote:

Don't listen to him, it's a brilliant idea. First the regular box set and Special Edition (including limited edition of lobster's mom figurines), then the Director's Cut, then the Remastered Edition, then the 3D version.

I'd skip the Remastered Edition, they ruined it when they made Tannhauser post second.

muttonchop wrote:
dejanzie wrote:

Don't listen to him, it's a brilliant idea. First the regular box set and Special Edition (including limited edition of lobster's mom figurines), then the Director's Cut, then the Remastered Edition, then the 3D version.

I'd skip the Remastered Edition, they ruined it when they made Tannhauser post second.

Winner! All we need is a GWJ "Tannhauser Posted First!" t-shirt.

muttonchop wrote:

I'd skip the Remastered Edition, they ruined it when they made Tannhauser post second.

Hah! Tanglebones has competition for P&C post of the month for August.

Malor wrote:
muttonchop wrote:

I'd skip the Remastered Edition, they ruined it when they made Tannhauser post second.

Hah! Tanglebones has competition for P&C post of the month for August.

Damn.. gonna have to up my game

Conservapedia wrote:

Conservative terms, which express conservative insights, are being generated at a faster rate, and with much higher quality, than liberal terms are. This implies an inevitable conservative triumph over liberalism.

Sadly, I have no evidence to refudiate this.

H.P. Lovesauce wrote:
Conservapedia wrote:

Conservative terms, which express conservative insights, are being generated at a faster rate, and with much higher quality, than liberal terms are. This implies an inevitable conservative triumph over liberalism.

Sadly, I have no evidence to refudiate this. :(

Me neither, but I'll happily say "Yeah, sorta like how cancer inevitably triumphs over a healthy body."

I love how the introduction of new ideas becomes a proxy for a philosophy which professes to view them with suspicion and resistance.

H.P. Lovesauce wrote:
Conservapedia wrote:

Conservative terms, which express conservative insights, are being generated at a faster rate, and with much higher quality, than liberal terms are. This implies an inevitable conservative triumph over liberalism.

Sadly, I have no evidence to refudiate this. :(

I will offer some wisdom a wise man once told me:

"Evil will always triumph, because good is dumb."

Dezlen wrote:
H.P. Lovesauce wrote:
Conservapedia wrote:

Conservative terms, which express conservative insights, are being generated at a faster rate, and with much higher quality, than liberal terms are. This implies an inevitable conservative triumph over liberalism.

Sadly, I have no evidence to refudiate this. :(

I will offer some wisdom a wise man once told me:

"Evil will always triumph, because good is dumb."

It is better to be loud and persistent than right, I guess.

Obviously being loud, persistent and not having to follow logic makes you right.

fangblackbone wrote:

Obviously being loud, persistent and not having to follow logic makes you right.

Not needing to apply any kind of rigor to your theories also means you can produce more.

LobsterMobster wrote:
SallyNasty wrote:
LobsterMobster wrote:

Maybe we should draw a distinction between having a good education and having a lot of education.

This is my favorite thing you have written and is fantastically true.

I'm good for one of those every now and then. Maybe I should start selling a box set? :D

I wouldn't go quite that far, but it's definitely sig-worthy.

H.P. Lovesauce wrote:
Conservapedia wrote:

Conservative terms, which express conservative insights, are being generated at a faster rate, and with much higher quality, than liberal terms are. This implies an inevitable conservative triumph over liberalism.

Sadly, I have no evidence to refudiate this. :(

I bolded the weak point in their argument for you, although for the moment the outcome appears to be the same.

Keldar wrote:
LobsterMobster wrote:
SallyNasty wrote:
LobsterMobster wrote:

Maybe we should draw a distinction between having a good education and having a lot of education.

This is my favorite thing you have written and is fantastically true.

I'm good for one of those every now and then. Maybe I should start selling a box set? :D

I wouldn't go quite that far, but it's definitely sig-worthy.

H.P. Lovesauce wrote:
Conservapedia wrote:

Conservative terms, which express conservative insights, are being generated at a faster rate, and with much higher quality, than liberal terms are. This implies an inevitable conservative triumph over liberalism.

Sadly, I have no evidence to refudiate this. :(

I bolded the weak point in their argument for you, although for the moment the outcome appears to be the same.

They certainly have the budget for higher production qualities. The issue still remains regarding the veracity of their arguments -- which is truly lacking.

Something made me think of this thread today. I was reading through a Civ 5 review on Kotaku. They started talking about the Social Policies aspect of the game that was being added and he made the comment that progressing in certain social policies prevents you from progressing in others. The example he then gave was:

(you can't advance a rational, scientific path if you have chosen to pursue a path of religious piety, for example).

I admit. I LOL'd

NSMike wrote:

What the HELL does he mean that the food industry depends on evolution not happening?

Because it could kill our bananas?

baggachipz wrote:
Paleocon wrote:

The whole example of the 13 and 17 year cicadas reminds me of the embarrassment of the banana video Cam Cameron made so famous.

You mean Kirk Cameron? Yeah, that's a classic.

Way late to this thread, but the idea of Cam Cameron being in the banana video made me chuckle.

"Rex Ryan's swarming blitz concepts are an atheist's nightmare!"