|
savetheclocktower posted:With you so far. University of Louisiana as a gem of your national education system? I just spent two years working there, and drat, that's just incredible.
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2009 00:27
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 06:41 |
|
|
JohnClark posted:I saw this one the other day, and aside from the general stupidity of it, the one that jumped out at me was the "57 states of Islam". What does that even mean? And how can they include the suggestion the he's a cryptomuslim while simulatenously critizing his attendance of a christian church? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jBSSLHc0Krk dun dun dun!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2009 05:52
|
|
|
freebooter posted:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_majority_countries there are, in fact, 57 member states of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference. Muslim president.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2009 22:03
|
|
|
Caustic posted:Remember, many democrats want American troops killed and Barbara Boxer how dare you want to be called Senator!!!!! Long fly Alaska!!!!! And Carly Fiorina has used this in her campaign against Boxer. I can't even imagine the mindset required to get mad about this. 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2009 20:52
|
|
|
Arguing on facebook is a swell idea. This is a total stranger replying to one post I made.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2011 17:59
|
|
|
I don't remember how that debate ended up going (it was around the height of the hysteria last year, shortly before Obama destroyed America with health care reform) but I'm pretty confident that nothing I could have said would have shut her up. I wasn't even defending the health care bill in the first place - I was obviously just a convenient proxy because it's hard to yell at the president directly.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2011 19:58
|
|
|
21stCentury posted:Wouldn't it be a lot more efficient to have the presidential elections work independently of state elections? I would assume the rural states would have a lot more luck getting a say with a statesman than by helping one president over the other... Sure, it'd make a lot more sense. But America's fundamental law (the constitution) is all but impossible to change. I find it a little bizarre that the basic mechanics of government are fixed in place by an experimental 18th century constitution, but I don't see what you can do about it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2011 04:17
|
|
|
Plank Walker posted:Edit: beaten, and yeah trying to get any amendment passed in the current climate of constitutional fetishism would be hilariously futile No kidding. That was my point.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2011 04:49
|
|
|
Lamuella posted:If you don't want to forward this for fear of offending someone, Number one way public policy is formulated: Forwarded chain emails!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2011 19:53
|
|
|
Lord Hawking posted:Funny you should mention that. This is a link shared by my cousin's wife through Facebook. The main image is about the death toll of malaria with an image of a young black child. Clicking it takes you to a petition about abortion. It took me quite a while to decide this wasn't an error.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2011 07:17
|
|
|
I've been on a self-hating kick lately, so I've been reading a lot about Conservapedia. Greatest hits include the project to rewrite the Bible in accordance with conservative morals, the hilarious exchange with Lenski over whether evolutionary biology is science, and of course denial of relativity. (As far as anyone can tell, this is all totally serious, at least for the founder Andrew Schlafly.) But my favorite has to be "Best New Conservative Words". Basically, Schlafly argues that "conservative insights increase over time at a geometric rate, as in 1-2-4-8-16-etc." As evidence, he cites the emergence of "conservative words". gently caress it, I'll just let the intro speak for itself: Achlafly posted:Each year the English language develops about a thousand new words. The King James Version of the Bible contains only about 8,000 different words;[1] many good words have since developed. These words include incoherent, gambit, correlate, caucus, plasticity, terrorism, tour de force, taxpayer, leadership, local, socialist(!), constant, bedrock, editorialize, worldview, alcoholism, harmless error, skullduggery, ugly duckling, crackpot, deflation ("an increase in the value of savings"), straw man, phony, greasy spoon, vet, mindset, Eagle Scout, balkanize, trivia, gang up, goon, agitprop, shotgun marriage, charisma, life vest, transistor, doublethink, elitism, parenting, back burner, informed consent, muscle car, wannabe, cyberbullying, patent troll, and scientific fascism. (I'm sure that last one is about to catch on.) In the apparently totally serious opinion of Mr. Schlafly, every one of these words is an example of conservative insight, and the list is a complete inventory of every such conservative word coined since 1600. Coincidentally, they happen to show a perfect geometrical growth pattern confirming his theory with no error or noise whatsoever. Some of the content on Conservapedia is probably from deep cover trolls, but this is straight from the founder's mind. This argument would get you a D- in high school civics. But Schlafly can't be dismissed as an idiot - he graduated from Princeton and Harvard, for instance. What causes people to turn to such an incredible, bizarre relationship to reality?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2011 14:37
|
|
|
jojoinnit posted:However, I just looked it up and Mr Schaflys degree from Princeton is in Engineering Physics, which means he has to be reasonably clever. That's not an easy degree, although maybe it says something about his grasp of the material that he never used it and got a law degree instead. RationalWiki says he was an engineer for a while: "He went to Princeton University (1981), graduating with a B.S.E. cum laude in Electrical Engineering, and worked as a device physicist for Intel, an electrical engineer at the applied physics laboratory of Johns Hopkins University,[9] and finally at Bell Labs.[10]" Perhaps he kept his strange physics views to himself at this time.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2011 16:22
|
|
|
Oh my god how do you become an electrical engineer and not "believe" in imaginary numbers, that is so loving awesomeShimrra Jamaane posted:I'm still not convinced that at least 3/4 of the contributes on Conservapedia aren't trolls. It's a source for a lot of the content on there, but I'm pretty sure this one is Aschlafly's baby. I wish there was some drug I could take to gain his amazing worldview, just for a day. (Worldview is an official conservative word, meaning "a comprehensive way of looking at life and the world; sometimes used to criticize a liberal's irrational belief system".)
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2011 20:01
|
|
|
Idran posted:Speaking of... "Liberals/atheists fail to realize or conveniently ignore that mere appeals to ridicule (which is a logical fallacy) is a poor substitute for evidence and logical thinking." These people are good at the cognitive dissonance.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2011 20:35
|
|
|
I think Conservapedia has blocked non-US users from even accessing the site. It's really for the better sort of people who have the good sense to live in America.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2011 21:43
|
|
|
Dameius posted:Speaking of Conservapedia, their best article has to be the one on evolution. I'm not really sure what segment is the best one to highlight but if I had to pick it would be everything past and including the section titled: Creation Scientists Tend to Win the Creation-Evolution Debates. Really puts the cognitive dissonance and blatant rewriting of reality to fit their own beliefs on display. Thing is, "creation scientists" do win the debates. Creationists pack the audience with their own, spew forth dozens and dozens of compelling problems with evolution, and refuse to engage their opponents on a factual level, instead successfully painting evolutionists as arrogant, mean, and dogmatic. If you don't have some science training and critical thinking skills, that's a rhetorical knockout. See http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/debating-creationists.html.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2011 11:56
|
|
|
Aliquid posted:I hadn't seen this one yet! There's probably a way here to explain to the sender the importance of white privilege (i.e. the right to be Christian without otherization) but I'm sure I'd never have the tact to do so.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2011 21:52
|
|
|
Man, Obama was lucky to escape impeachment or even nuclear war in the aftermath of giving those Region 1 DVDs to Gordon Brown. Worst president ever.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2011 21:22
|
|
|
Guys, we need to get REALISTIC about spending reduction. That's why we should ax all these agencies which are all "waste" because I say so, including tiny ones I've never heard of.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2011 23:44
|
|
|
tek79 posted:I don't have time to read that much crazy, but I'm guessing it's just spinning the gently caress out of some tiny non-issue or outright lying, but maybe someone with a background in law can correct me but wouldn't disobeying direct orders from the Commander-in-Chief be tantamount to treason? As in, punishable by death treason? Someone in a high position would probably just get forced out, as with MacArthur.
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2011 20:06
|
|
|
From The Onion: Planned Parenthood Opens $8 Billion Abortionplex From The Crazies: 
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2011 16:21
|
|
|
If your facebook feed doesn't have enough crazy reactionaries, I heartily recommend the US Constitution's page.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2011 02:27
|
|
|
It's not enough to disagree with Obama or even say he's incompetent - he has to literally hate freedom and want to destroy the country.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2011 03:13
|
|
|
The Russians were all atheists, so I don't know how they made it in to that one.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2011 23:49
|
|
|
quote:FYI The disturbing part is that someone took the time to write a long diatribe about it instead of just spending a minute searching. No wonder Gmail thinks it's spam.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2011 20:35
|
|
|
Sarion posted:Or if the goal of socialism was to force everyone to make the same money. Few, if any, liberals I know would support the idea that everyone should get equal pay. Don't conflate American liberals with socialists - that's the category error made over and over by right-wingers and it's deeply misleading.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2011 02:05
|
|
|
A flat tax that included capital gains could (in some ways) be more progressive than the current system.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2011 01:11
|
|
|
Sarion posted:Is it a conservative thing? I don't know enough about the treaties, but it seems like any sort of agreement like these gets the whole "the rest of the world can't control us - WAAAAGH!!" treatment from the right, no matter how reasonable and unobtrusive it is. But it might just be a US thing in general. Partly, but not entirely - I mean the Senate rejected the Kyoto Protocol 95-0. Democrats aren't that big on multilateralism either.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2011 17:08
|
|
|
craigslist posted:Well said. YOU BASTARDS, TRYING TO TAKE A HIKE THIS IS ALL YOUR FAULT
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2011 15:20
|
|
|
I wish I were an illegal alien, so I could get some of those sweet sweet "payments"
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2011 23:39
|
|
|
Duncan Doenitz posted:This one has probably been around for a while, but it's my first time seeing it, and it's probably the most vitriolic public assistance-shaming I've ever seen. Government employees reforming from within 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 23, 2013 09:29
|
|
|
stan worship posted:What's so strange, is it's not even like it matters, ultimately. Yeah, the GOP is the party of Lincoln. It's also the party of Benjamin Harrison, who promised to end Reconstruction in exchange for the House Democrats letting him win the 1876 election when it was too close to call. African Americans in the south were immediately buried under Jim Crow for the next 80-90 years. The Plessy v. Ferguson case was decided by 8 justices, only two of whom were Democratic appointments. Jim Crow laws were upheld 7-1 in that case. If it was only Democrats who were "the real racists", that case should have gone 6-2 for overturning segregation. I think it's worth pointing out the bottom of the image (obscured in that screenshot) calls for blacks to leave "the Democrat plantation". It's not just bad history, it's bad politics too – or perhaps just another idiotic Thanksgiving dinner talking point?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2013 02:40
|
|
|
BonoMan posted:"Science supports his existence!" This is at the elite university where a freshman philosophy class is ordered to write "God Is Dead" to pass. I think there might be some fictionalized aspects of this real-life persecution story.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2013 03:59
|
|
|
Job Truniht posted:Wouldn't even a basic difference of means test say that those two normal curves are statistically insignificant? Not according to the first link from Kahan, which says that there was a small, statistically significant positive correlation between tea partying and science IQ. Kahan points out afterward that "Again, the relationship is trivially small, and can't possibly be contributing in any way to the ferocious conflicts over decision-relevant science that we are experiencing." AShamefulDisplay posted:It wasnt even really a scientific study. It looks more to me like the dude was bored, grabbed some data from someone else, and cobbled up a histogram. Nothing wrong with that, but this seems to me to be about playing with numbers than an actual scientific paper. C'mon, the links are right there. This is a post-hoc analysis by a respected scholar, it's not illegitimate because you say so.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2013 07:02
|
|
|
AShamefulDisplay posted:I dont think it is illegitimate, I just dont think it is as rigorous as some have been trying to pass it off as. His analysis is incomplete. As a grad student trained in the methodology that Kahan's describes in his blog post, I don't see any reason to question the conclusions. I mean, this particular post-hoc analysis is not peer-reviewed but he got the data from his own peer-reviewed publication. edit: Also what Strudel Man says. While this "proof" of tea party smarts was misreported in a wide range of conservative media, Kahan makes it very clear that it doesn't say what the macro makers think it does.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2013 07:16
|
|
|
Fart Sandwiches posted:Holy poo poo. With folks like this I usually skip the perfunctory debate over whatever insane thing they're claiming and just compare them to Nazis. But in this case it might not get my feelings across too well!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2013 12:55
|
|
|
Cops are disgusting, and also they have facebook pages 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2013 09:21
|
|
|
Oh my god, we've elected a politician to office! Noooooooo
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2013 19:56
|
|
|
blackmet posted:How, exactly, will he know it's Obamacare? Um, didn't you get yours already? 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2013 04:37
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 06:41 |
|
|
I left the group already but in the future, if you get an invite to any closed facebook groups for political debate, say HELL NO. Trust me on this one. 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2013 04:02
|
|