Total posts: 3,556
-->
@Best.Korea
Kim Jong Un is destined to win.
Oh pulease, he's a total loser.
He even lost out on the Presidency of North Korea to a guy who died in 1994....a fucking dead guy beat him.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
What if I told you that you can completely reject everything about the What if I told you that you can completely reject everything about the Transgender narrative. That's what it is, a social/political narrative based solely on opinion.
Then I'd think you are the only person to give an honest answer.
Interesting term, "Transgender narrative" and "social/political narrative", I think you are talking about the political rhetoric that is being used. Why does that resonate with you?
I'll be the first to admit I don't understand the whole transgender thing, from the outside looking in it appears to be as very difficult way to be, but I don't see why that should translate into disapproval, mostly I'm just glad its not something I have to deal with. If you get past the rhetoric, what we are talking about is people, do you just disapprove of transgender people?
A lot of people are refusing to use the preferred pronouns for transgender people, what do you suppose they think that accomplishes? Is it just a matter of choosing a side, establishing membership in something? Does it solve anything? Is it satisfying in some way to refuse to use a preferred pronoun? How did a pronoun become such a huge thing?
Of all people on this site, you strike me as the least likely to be controlled by a politician's rhetoric. It wasn't that long ago that nobody really cared about pronouns, it just wasn't a political thing at all, transgender people were not a political issue.
Then some politicians decided to use this issue to polarize people, how did they come to own you of all people. I would expect you to be the first person to tell politicians to fuck off before you'd let them tell you what to think.
.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mall
So saying 1 being different than 2 is not telling the truth according to what you're conveying.One person is not different than more than one person.In regards to what people want to be called, how far are we going to go into a delusion suppressing physical facts?Do we just draw the line at the first sign of pure harm?
OK, and this "pure harm" you are so worried about, that's what we want to understand. When I address someone the way they want to be addressed, there is no harm done, why is it harmful if you were to do it?
How exactly are you harmed by the act of addressing others the way they want to be addressed?
What makes you the "victim" of the pronouns transgender people prefer?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
@ADreamOfLiberty
"I Love the Poorly Educated" - Donald Trump
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mall
Oh hopefully this is clearer to you. I want to be correct and telling the truth in using certain language.For example , one person , a male or female, is not a them or they. It's like saying one is the same as two.Want to be correct in the language, the language, the language, the language.People are adding all these other social facets. My point has no interest, concern or relevancy to that.
I've read your posts, it's obvious that you have no interest in the correct use of language.
So that is not why.
Why can't you just be honest?
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Did you pay Bezos too? Good lord.
Nope, nobody said anything about Bezos, you must be deaf.
Created:
For MAGA folks, the majority of medical problems occur right after you hear the words, "Hold my beer and watch this".
Created:
-->
@FLRW
Evangelicals know that Trump is Jesus.
MAGA Evangelicals know that Trump is better than Jesus. He's not a savior, he's a savior because he was captured. MAGA Evangelicals like people who weren't captured, okay?
Created:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
He’s serving in the military
You mean he was one of those suckers that didn't have the good sense to have bone spurs? Doesn't he know American soldiers who die in battle are "suckers" and "losers".
But the MAGA MORONS just laughed at Trump’s disgusting comment.
They crave the red meat of patriot denigration, and Trump always delivers on their feeding frenzy.
The Republican Party is a disgrace.
MAGA is not Republican, its a fascist movement.
Btw, where is Trump’s gold digging, former sex worker of a wife? We haven’t seen Melania with Trump at his rallies or in court.
If he brings Melania to a rally then he can't get laid, she cuts down on the porn star action when he's on the road.
Created:
-->
@Mall
Ohhhh the standard is other presidents that have supposedly been greater than Trump apparently are not great enough to win conversations to discuss their so much "more "greatness.Think about it. I've done great things as a president according to those who count greatness for what it's worth that really means what it means.Here's somebody else that has done things far from great according to those who count greatness for what it's worth that really means what it means.They get more attention, more shine than my what's supposed to be "greater" term.So this other somebody might as well be the greatest for what it's worth.I hope many of you finally got the point.
Just reading this post made my IQ drop, and I think it's still going down, make it stop, make it stop.
Damn, I really hope it's only a temporary effect and not permanent,
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
It's time to replace politicians with AI congresspersons.
Currently, Artificial Intelligence is not advanced enough to replace politicians, and realistically, AI technology will probably never be capable of actually simulating congresspersons, practically speaking, there are limits to what AI can accomplish.
Now, when they develop Artificial Stupidity, then it's a done deal.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
I think what Trump is really selling to his base is victimhood.
The racists are now the victims of racism.
Transgender folks want us to use a certain pronoun and MAGA people are traumatized, they are victims of oppression.
They lose an election, and they are the victims of democracy.
You say slavery was bad for black people and they are victims of people trying to make their children feel bad, of coursewhite children are the real victims of slavery.
People are fleeing death and oppression and MAGA folks are the victims of immigration.
A million people die of Covid, and they are the victims of masks.
Trump breaks the law and he's a victim of the justice department.
The news presents the truth and Trump is the victim of the news.
A football player took a knee in 2016 and they are still screeching victimhood about it.
MAGA snowflakes think Trump is their Messiah because he brought down victimhood from the mountaintop.
It isn't grievance politics so much as it is a glorious celebration of victimhood.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mall
It does matter to me in the language we're using. We may have error here.
How many times do I have to ask, why does it matter to you?
What exactly is it that upsets you about people preferring certain pronouns?
I couldn't care less, why does it bother you?
If it isn't bigotry, then what is it?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mall
It does matter to me in the language we're using. We may have error here.
I know that, the question is why does it matter to you?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it's a matter of bigotry.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
I dont see why would anyone make a big deal out of calling people the way they want to be called.
I want to know that too, but the outraged are just going to stand around whistling and pretending they don't know what we are talking about.
They don't want to admit it's just bigotry, but there isn't anything else to say, so they whistle.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sam_Flynn
Dumb topic.IT's all about mental illness. Period.
Does mental illness upset you?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mall
The transgender folks and whoever that makes their gender identity significant in this way emphasize the pronouns.For instance a male may communicate that they're not to be addressed as him or himself.Granted that male perceives themselves as wanting to be female.Why do you think they request strictly to only be identified in third person as they and them?What is the significance of that specifically?
It's a matter of personal preference, and I'm sure everyone has their own reasons for wanting to be addressed with a certain kind of pronoun.
Does that matter to you? If so, why?
I'm serious. I'm old as dirt and I've been meeting people my entire life, its almost a standard part of the meeting process to find out what the person wants to be called, I'll bet I've straight up asked "What do you want me to call you" a hundred times. They tell me, I say OK, and that's what I call them, and never in my life did someone tell me what they wanted me to call them and it upset me, or bothered me, or whatever it is that's going on about it. All of a sudden people are terribly upset about what transgender people want to be called and I really don't get it. All I really know about transgender people is that they are having a very different experience than I'm having, I don't get it, and I don't know what pronoun I'm supposed to use, I would certainly be more comfortable if I knew what pronoun I'm supposed to use, and so I appreciate when they tell me. And that's not just transgender people, my whole life I've been running across different kinds of people and I always want to know what I'm supposed to call them, and always appreciate it when they tell me, and if they don't think to, I ask. Never once, ever, did the answer bother me, if somebody asked me to refer to them as a Martian, ok, so what.
And it's not just me, that is just the way it has been for everybody, for decades, meet people, find out how they want to be addressed, and then you know how to talk to each other, nothing complicated, it was just the way things were, for decades.
All of a sudden, not that many years ago, as it relates to transgender people, this all changed, dramatically, all of a sudden there is outrage, and anger and drama, and debate posts, and I really don't know what's going on, I do not understand. Why does anybody care?
I want to hear from the outraged, can someone please explain why you are upset about this. I sincerely want to understand it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
We already do.Though we haven't yet streamlined the process.I'm guessing that it will just naturally streamline itself, in response to evolutionary requirements...Such as escaping Planet Earth.
No way, in fact humanity is getting softer, heck, my generation walked a hundred miles in the snow to get to school, uphill, both ways, and all we had to eat was dirt, and we were grateful...
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@n8nrgim
especially if we are branching out into space. just let the best and brightest reproduce, say on mars. then remove problematic humans and genes and put them back on earth. even if there is speciation, it's still a decendent of humans and part of our lineage, so it has value. we have the knowledge and technology to do this... so it should be done.even if this wasn't done on mars... we can still breed super humans on earth.
It wasn't done on Mars, well why not?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mall
"Evolution’s basic mechanism"There's serious conflict with this explanation.
You want to be a little more specific?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mall
In your mind what would you say as to why people find incest disgusting as opposed to homosexuality?
Evolution’s basic mechanism is “survival of the fittest”, and because incest is more likely to produce defective offspring with lower degrees of fitness, you would expect natural mechanisms for incest avoidance to develop.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mall
In your mind what would you say as to why people find incest disgusting as opposed to homosexuality?
Evolution’s basic mechanism is “survival of the fittest”, and because incest is more likely to produce defective offspring with lower degrees of fitness, you would expect natural mechanisms for incest avoidance to develop.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
So tell me, who wants a civil war again?
Just a bunch of green teeth rednecks, you know, the MAGA base.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
The only people making salient points are the justices. As usual Clarence Thomas showing himself to be a real judge.
Yep, he's the best Supreme Court Justice money can buy.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sam_Flynn
Well genius, Trump couldn’t possibly be President in 2024He will be. Please post a video of you falling to our knees screaming "NOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!"
No, IWRA is correct, it is impossible for Trump to be President in 2024.
As the Twentieth Amendment states, “the terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January … and the terms of their successors shall then begin.” That would be January 20th, 2025.
Please post a video of you falling to your knees screaming "I'M SUCH A DUMB ASS!!!!!"
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sam_Flynn
Ummmm, I hate to be the one to break it to you, but Trump lost the 2020 election,No, the election was stolen through corrupt means.
A unicorn told you that, right?
Created:
Posted in:
Yes, even as an ex-President he is able to make sure the Republicans can't govern.
You guys just love to lose.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Trump wasn't elected president for the 2nd impeachment. Congress can do whatever they want to. Nothing will stop them from impeaching president-elect Trump in November 2024.
8 years late for that.
Created:
“When you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything.” —Donald Trump
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
I hope Congress impeaches Trump 3 times in 2024. That will surely get Trump.
Ummmm, I hate to be the one to break it to you, but Trump lost the 2020 election, so he can't be impeached in 2024.
Unless you mean going to jail, he can certainly do that three times in 2024.
Created:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
what do you think of sidewalker's take?
It’s not my take, it’s Niels Bohr’s take, codified as the Copenhagen Interpretation, the most prevalent interpretation among working quantum physicists.
[Sidewalker] Quantum Physics, the Copenhagen interpretation, the particle actually comes into being physically when it is observed.That's not everything in the Copenhagen interpretation
No shit? Are you saying the Copenhagen interpretationis more than a single sentence, well gee whiz, thanks for clearing that up forus Pumpkin.
but it is correct if you substitute "it is observed" with "wave collapse/interaction occurs"
It’s correct as is, we’re talking Copenhagen Interpretation, Niels Bohr gets to be the authority here, and he insisted that it was a “sentient observer” that was necessary to collapse the wave function.
[Sidewalker] Because of the dual nature of reality at the quantum levelMysticism
That’s quite a non-sequitur, anyone with even a cursory familiarity of the subject matter recognizes the wave and particle nature of light and matter in quantum physics.
Here’s an idea, try Googling “complementarity”, it’s another term Niels Bohr introduced (funny how that name keeps coming up in discussions about the Copenhagen Interpretation), it was Bohr’s attempt to addresses the fact that although “particle” and “wave” are mutually exclusive terms, “complementarity” accounted for the resultant “dual nature of reality at the quantum level” with the concept of “complementarity” as an explanation for the fact that different conditions of observation could yield conceptually incompatible conclusions of either “particle” or “wave”. This is really basic stuff, if you find it interesting, maybe you should try learning something about quantum physics.
[Sidewalker] particles can be “completely” represented mathematically by a “wave function”, this is a central tenet of quantum physics.Yes, keeping in mind you're talking about the properties (essence) that manifest on wave collapse in discreet quanta, remember he just said there are no particles in the wave only on collapse.
The sentence being responded to is straightforward and universally accepted as a simple fact of the matter, it really isn’t necessary to “keep in mind” this strange and meaningless sentence. The wave function applies to any quantum system, not just discreet quanta, and “there are no particles in the wave only on collapse” isn’t even wrong, it’s not even a sentence. Maybe you really don’t understand wave/particle duality, which is to say you don’t understand the first thing about quantum physics.
That’s the problem with Google Scholars, they look up facts and repeat them without knowing how they relate, they posture without any real understanding of the subject matter.
[Sidewalker] In quantum theory, a particle exists in a juxtaposition of possible states; only when it is measured does it take on definite qualities, like position and momentum.The part of the Copenhagen interpretation that confuses people and contradicts itself. "We" just said there is no particle except at the instant of collapse. That is correct. This is not.
LOL, quit your blathering, the sentence is an accurate and straightforward explanation of the collapse of the wave function. In the standard model particles can exist as probability waves in Hilbert space when they are not being observed or measured. This is precisely why the particle can interfere with itself in the double slit experiment.
I’m sorry, but I just can’t dumb it down any further for you, if you really don’t know anything at all about quantum physics, perhaps you should at least try not to embarrass yourself.
[Sidewalker] These are not waves of some underlying stuffWhatever this is supposed to mean precisely it's probably wrong. The waves involved all satisfy Schrodinger's equation but many were identified long before as waves of force-fields, the most commonly studied (and relevant for most science) are electromagnetic waves.
LOL, you don’t know what it means but you have a feeling it’s wrong, you are a real hoot kid.
[Sidewalker] they are mathematical waves of probabilityThey are both.
Nope, we were talking about the Copenhagen Interpretation, the wave function does not directly represent an independent physical reality, it represents a sentient observer's subjective state of knowledge about the underlying reality.
[Sidewalker] a field of pure possibility that goes unrealized until it is “collapsed” by an observer, theoretically then, the act of observing seems to conjure the particle into existence out of a mathematical haze of probability.That's what the first statement said, but the unwarranted flowery and misleading language is continuing to snowball."observation" can be done by a single atom. That's not what people think intuitively when you say "observation". Again (I'm really a broken record) "interaction" is a better word.
Nope, maybe you should Google “Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Physics”, I was pretty damn explicit about that being what I was talking about, perhaps you should get a clue and stop embarrassing yourself. You want to thumb your nose at Niels Bohr and say neener neener, that’s fine, but quit pretending that you understand the first thing about the Copenhagen interpretation and its implications. That is the subject matter of my post, don’t care that it upsets you. Get over it.
Or….stop posing and just say you disagree with the Copenhagen Interpretation.
I say "manifest", he says "conjure". Whatever makes you happy."out of a mathematical haze of probability"Math describes nature, nature isn't math. This stretches poetic license.[Sidewalker] The “bigger implication” is not that “our consciousness can affect reality”, it is consciousness actually brings about reality, the particle can be “actualized,” or made “real” by the observation that collapses the wave function, which gives it spatial and temporal existence.We've now crossed over fully into mysticism with no admixture of scientific theory supported by evidence.
I guess “mysticism” is just something you say when you don’t understand something, I’ll bet you say it a lot. You really have no ability to follow along with a logical chain of reasoning, the statement follows logically from the implications of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum physics.
Try to keep in mind, your sentient “single atoms” that can “observe” do not exist in the Copenhagen interpretation, in the Copenhagen Interpretation only a “sentient observer” brings about the collapse of the wave function, which imparts the qualities of time and space to the mathematically represented particle. I’m really sorry if the Copenhagen interpretation upsets you, maybe thumbing your nose at Niels Bohr some more will make you feel better.
[Sidewalker] The mind-boggling implication is that the objective world cannot even be said to exist outside of the subjective act of observation.<monty python peasant voice>Now you see what I've been on about, did you see him try to deny objective reality?</monty python peasant voice>
Yes, I always find you comical, but the fact remains that ontologically and epistemologically, the Copenhagen interpretation runs straight into the heart of idealism.
[Sidewalker] This enforces the age-old hypothesis that consciousness is fundamental aspect of physical reality after all, perhaps the only ultimate reality.It does not. If consciousness creates reality there is no way we can support that conclusion by the fact that physical quanta manifest during quantum wave collapse whether we know about the collapse or not.It's a thing that happens. End of story. This the makes exactly as much sense as saying "Since color only exists when I see it we know consciousness is a fundamental aspect of physical reality after all"
LOL, my my, relax, count to ten or something, there is nothing to be upset about, the chain of reasoning I presented is straight forward, maybe read the OP again for context, it was about Quantum Physics and the OP asked about the “bigger implications for consciousness affecting reality”. That’s an invitation to speak to the Copenhagen interpretation and its implications, and that’s what I did.
[Sidewalker]As Neils Bohr, John Wheeler, Henry Stapp, and many other quantum physicists believed, perhaps consciousness cannot be considered just a by-product of the physical activity of the brain.Many people believe that. No one who understands quantum mechanics thinks quantum mechanics supports this thesis.
LOL, you just have to love Google Scholars, the guy with the big floppy shoes and red Styrofoam nose thinks he understands quantum mechanics, while claiming Niels Bohr, John Wheeler, and Henry Stapp, and most working quantum physicists do not. You posers really do crack me up.
[Sidewalker]In the end, we have some scientists trying to reduce matter to consciousness, and others trying to reduce consciousness to matter, we seem to be caught in one big loop.I would suggest trying to actually understand it by looking at the math and experiments as opposed to watching pseudoscience docuseries.
Nope, I’m a book guy, you should try onesometime, it results in understanding much better than Googling facts andpretending does.
[Sidewalker]I always enjoy seeing our spiritual detractors throw a conniptionI hope Sidewalker is entertained by my conniption. I am less amused by this subversion of the scientific method (and the respect it has earned) to serve anti-rationalism.
LOL, now now, try to calm down, justbecause you don’t understand the subject matter, and can’t follow the logical processof reasoning, that doesn’t mean your scientific knowledge or your ability to berational is under attack, oh wait, yes it does, ummmm…nevermind.
[Sidewalker] if you do think consciousness is fundamental to the existence of physical reality, this raises the possibility that some sort of consciousness was necessary to make the universe actual in the first place, a preexistent consciousness that transcends the material universe of science.Well Sidewalker has hit the nail on the head here. Reason is so much easier to leave behind when you have a belief that you've already decided to have faith in.
I’m not making an assertion by any stretch of the imagination, I’m simply pointing out that for those who are so inclined, it can be seen in those terms. You have to have a serious comprehension issue to read “if you do think” followed by “this raises the possibility” and think it’s an assertion, it isn’t. It’s an invitation to discuss.
I saw the OP as an opportunity to solicit some intelligent discussion, but unfortunately my post hasn’t attracted any yet, so far, just a Poser.
Created:
-->
@Mall
Is it wrong to kill human people but not non human animals?
Morality depends on circumstance and motivation, and consequently, there are degrees of right and wrong.
Under most circumstances it is wrong to kill humans, circumstance and motivation are determining factors.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
There seems to be a phenomenon in online discussion, especially about politics and religion, where people think if they say something very stupid about a subject matter it makes the subject matter look stupid, but of course it doesn't, it only makes the person who said the stupid thing look stupid.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ponikshiy
That sounds like a very interesting ideal for a show
Now you're talking, and if they change it to "Shoot the Traitor", then I hope they have Trump on Season 1.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ponikshiy
Oh, OK, since it is called "Traitor", I suppose it is based on January 6, is the primary character orange perhaps?
Created:
-->
@n8nrgim
some folks say like the double slit experiment, that the particles are affected by measuring them.others say often on the topic of quantum mechanics, that simply observing particles at the quantum state affects them.the bigger implication, is that there's those who say our consciousness can affect reality. which is true to the extent that we can measure quanta, with our devices and tools. but if all that is requirement is observation, then that's a bigger fish to fry for consciousness affecting reality
Quantum Theory goes much farther as it relates to your questions here, it’s not just that the particles are “affected by observation”, according to the most prevalent interpretation of Quantum Physics, the Copenhagen interpretation, the particle actually comes into being physically when it is observed.
Because of the dual nature of reality at the quantum level, particles can be “completely” represented mathematically by a “wave function”, this is a central tenet of quantum physics. In quantum theory, a particle exists in a juxtaposition of possible states; only when it is measured does it take on definite qualities, like position and momentum. These are not waves of some underlying stuff, they are mathematical waves of probability, a field of pure possibility that goes unrealized until it is “collapsed” by an observer, theoretically then, the act of observing seems to conjure the particle into existence out of a mathematical haze of probability.
The “bigger implication” is not that “our consciousness can affect reality”, it is consciousness actually brings about reality, the particle can be “actualized,” or made “real” by the observation that collapses the wave function, which gives it spatial and temporal existence. The mind-boggling implication is that the objective world cannot even be said to exist outside of the subjective act of observation.
This enforces the age-old hypothesis that consciousness is fundamental aspect of physical reality after all, perhaps the only ultimate reality. As Neils Bohr, John Wheeler, Henry Stapp, and many other quantum physicists believed, perhaps consciousness cannot be considered just a by-product of the physical activity of the brain. Perhaps consciousness has to be present for there to be an actual physical world containing brains at all. In the end, we have some scientists trying to reduce matter to consciousness, and others trying to reduce consciousness to matter, we seem to be caught in one big loop.
I always enjoy seeing our spiritual detractors throw a conniption, so I will add that, if you do think consciousness is fundamental to the existence of physical reality, this raises the possibility that some sort of consciousness was necessary to make the universe actual in the first place, a preexistent consciousness that transcends the material universe of science.
We shall not cease from exploration
And the end of all our exploring
Will be to arrive where we started
And know the place for the first time.
T.S. Eliot
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ponikshiy
Traitors is a reality TV show that has versions in the United states, great Britain and Australia. This thread I for discussion of that show and thoughts on it.
I think you are confused, yes, they released the January 6 footage, but it is not a reality TV show, it was actual video recordings of what happened on January 6th, 2021 at the US Capital.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Have you stopped eating babies yet?
Witch hunt, fake news, politically motivated, I'm the most mistreated person ever, you have Sidewalker Derangement Syndrome, boo hoo hoo.
Created:
-->
@FLRW
It is calculated that more than 26,000 rape-caused pregnancies may have taken place in Texas alone. The findings were published on Wednesday in JAMA Internal Medicine.
How many MAGA beheadings did they have?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
I hope everybody saw my sarcasm in my last post.I think so, the point was that the MAGA movement is fascist too, right?But of course, the comparison is unfair, Hitler was never charged with 91 felonies, and he never had 27 women accuse him of rape.Once TDS reaches this stage, there is no cure. I'm sorry Mrs. Sidewalker, there is no hope. He currently thinks Donald Trump is worse than Hitler based on the willingness of fellow patients to accuse him of crimes.
ADOL thinks Trump is a better Fascist than Hitler, got it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DavidAZZ
I hope everybody saw my sarcasm in my last post.
I think so, the point was that the MAGA movement is fascist too, right?
But of course, the comparison is unfair, Hitler was never charged with 91 felonies, and he never had 27 women accuse him of rape.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
Elon Musk's controversial startup Neuralink has implanted a chip in a human brain for the first time, the billionaire said in a post on his X platform late Monday.Does anyone else think it was Gp?
They put a chimp in GPs brain?
That explains a lot.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mall
How do you know a dog has moral value?
I know my dog does, Baxter is a better person than I am.
Created:
Posted in:
What’s the difference between a Texan and a dog?
The dog eventually stops barking.
Big talk, big belt buckles, big hats, no cattle.
Created:
-->
@Mall
So Mall, I owe you an apology.
In the thread about people choosing to be gay, I was trying to antagonize you rather than actually discuss. To explain, it was a matter of mistaken identity, I thought you were someone else, he's a total asshole who has earned my contempt, but I realized it wasn't you. So, I'm sorry about the approach I took.
I still think your position is inane, but I should have argued in a more respectful manner.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Imagine disliking Trump still in the year 2024 is that even healthy?I'm old enough to remember rappers talking about how they wanted to be like Trump. Looks like that trend might be coming back.
Snoop 's been hanging with Martha Stewart, and obviously, she is a bad influence.
Created:
Plus ,there's ebuc and Best.Korea to consider, there's no fucking way either one of them is from this planet :)
Created:
I think Fermi's Paradox overestimates the desire/ability to make contact in a form that we could detect, especially considering the great distances involved, and the great diversity it could entail. Different intelligent species will communicate differently, they will have different values and motivations, we shouldn't just assume that at some point in their development they are motivated to communicate, or explore, and even if they do, there is no reason to assume it would be in a form we could detect. We don't even know if other intelligent life forms would necessarily be carbon based, they could be silicon based, they could be microscopic compared to us, there can be a million imaginable differences which might provide a barrier to communication, and a billion differences we can't imagine.
Created: