Messages

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

1

The Show / Re: Sex with little kids, Tech 9s for Murderers

« on: August 05, 2009, 11:13:44 AM »

For you half-wits with no patience, this is actually worth reading. I realize that you went to public school, so the closest you came to actually reading a book was the Cliff's Notes, but this isn't even an article, it's barely an essay. Gird your loins and actually read something for once. Besides, your life is far more TL;DR than this guy's post is. He's thought provoking, and I'd actually like to see people take him on. Besides me, though I may well respond.

C'mon, isn't it a little unfair to brand anyone who TL;DR a half-wit?  Anyone who has spent a little time on forums has probably read enough page-long brainfarts to know that in 99% of cases, a long post isn't worth reading.  It's too bad for the 1% like the OP, but I believe a good post should be only as long as necessary, and if you're a new poster without an established reputation on the forum, it's something you need to consider.

2

The Show / Re: Conformity Experiments

« on: August 05, 2009, 11:09:06 AM »

I think Julia mentioned that she didn't think she'd fall for the conformity trick.

Yeah, the vast majority of people say that.

I wish I could say that about myself for sure.  I don't consider myself a conformist, but I  also dislike attracting attention to myself, and I do think that in some cases there is wisdom in avoiding rocking the boat.

3

General / Re: Mark Edgerton is a fucking murderer.

« on: July 01, 2009, 01:10:27 PM »

4

General / Re: One of my facebook friends shared this with me.

« on: June 24, 2009, 06:38:43 AM »

And you know what I think about you? I think you are a loose cannon that likes to go off on petty profanity-loaded rants and tirades against people, like you are going off on me right now for the fifth or sixth time on this site, not even counting the times you've exploded on me on other sites.

5

General / Re: two year old has IQ of 156...

« on: May 03, 2009, 08:34:21 AM »

What does that say about society nowadays that a 156 IQ is newsworthy.

Let's face it, the mainstream media is awash with far less newsworthy stories than one about a bright kid.  This story, as uninteresting as it might be, is still more newsworthy than all the celebrity gossip and sports news put together, at least in my opinion, YMMV.

6

General / Re: Family who are 'too fat to work' say £22,000 worth of benefits is not enough

« on: March 19, 2009, 09:28:10 AM »

I read this yesterday and it made me rage so hard that I sent it to my dad & brother.  Usually when I see stories about some welfare parasite, I kind of shrug it off, because in most cases of extreme parasitism (eg welfare family with 11 kids), those people are essentially trapped in the system so I blame the government.  What I mean by trapped, is that a mother/father with several kids would be worse off working in most cases, so it's easier for me to blame the system that allowed them to do this in the first place than the individuals involved.

These individuals, however, absolutely enrage and disgust me.  Nothing at all is keeping them from working.  There are so many things to rage about, each quote in the article is more rage inducing than the last.

First, the wilful ignorance - "healthy food is too expensive".  They admit they eat bacon - as if oats, skim milk, lentils, legumes, frozen veg, dried beans, whole pasta and rice are expensive.  Hell, lean chicken is cheaper than bacon.  All of the above can form the basis of a healthy diet, and most are ridiculously cheap.

Then, total lack of regard for cause & effect.  "Our condition is hereditary" they say, and a few sentences later, "we eat about 3000 calories a day".  Perhaps the "condition" to which they refer is gluttony.

Then, the contradictions.  "We're too busy to work".  What do they do all day?  "We get up and watch TV all day".  How anybody could make these two statements and keep a straight face is beyond me.

Finally, the sense of entitlement, "we deserve more money for free".

These people exemplify so much of what is wrong with modern society; the entitlement mentality, the gluttony, the high time preference and disrespect for those who work hard.  And these parasites are multiplying.  They sow the seeds of their own destruction, as one day the host will either die or shed itself of parasites by moving elsewhere, and god help them when there's nobody left to feed off.

Sorry about the length, but this is the first article I've read that's made me rage so much since I resolved to try and care less about all the bullshit in this country.

7

General / Re: UK libertarian movement

« on: September 11, 2008, 05:15:33 PM »

I'd be interested to hear if anyone has had any dealings with them?

I saw this a while ago, and dismissed them after reading their manifesto:

http://lpuk.org/pages/manifesto.php

Education vouchers, immigration controls, taxes on consumption, wishy-washy firearms positions, etc etc.  This horseshit is considered radical libertarianism in the UK.  Man I hate this socialist shithole.

8

The Polling Pit / Re: Moral AnCap Arguments For Welfare Fraud

« on: August 25, 2008, 05:43:57 AM »

I do not believe it to be justified to try and get welfare without paying taxes. If you don't put into the system, then by removing from the system you essentially steal other peoples' money. At least if you DO indeed pay taxes you have some claim to the money in there.

In principle I agree, but in practice, every dollar stolen via welfare (whether by fraud or "legal" means) is one less dollar the government can spend on war and domestic oppression.  I'm pretty sure that if from next week nobody claims welfare, taxes wouldn't go down and the government would just find something else to waste money on.

Also, I sometimes feel that if more people committed welfare fraud, the sooner the whole system would go bankrupt.

9

The Polling Pit / Re: Are Libertarians overly cynical?

« on: February 18, 2008, 04:51:43 PM »

I don't frequent many political forums, but of all the forums i've ever been on, there seems to be more cynicism and infighting over petty bullshit than in any other demographic I've ever encountered. Given, the FTL BBS is a pretty small sample for libertarians, but still, it seems pretty staggering how quick people are to jump down each others throats for not sharing exactly the same viewpoint as them, and are more content to mock, insult or simply troll than to try and have a passionate reasoned debate.

I know exactly what you mean.

10

The Polling Pit / Re: Unimportant Scientific Pursuits

« on: January 24, 2008, 11:04:05 AM »

Okay, here's an interesting question then-- are these people, the ones who feel the need to go out and "prove" the Bible, more or less rational than the ones who say that the Bible is the word of God, and because it's the word of God there's no need to prove anything since it's all based on faith?

I have to admit to having some sympathy for the "provers," principally I suppose because I think faith is a lousy reason to believe in anything. 

"Provers" are probably more rational IMO, they just don't have a good understanding of what science is all about.

As for most unimportant scientific pursuit, its hard to make such a bold statement, none of us here being professional scientists, but I would say that SETI is probably the pursuit that is probably least likely to provide any tangible benefits to humanity, but its a purely subjective preference, if a scientist wants to study in one field then thats the most useful field he can study in for himself.

Although I would say its a colossal waste of money when it is obvious there is no other intelligent life in the solar system, probably nothing in this galaxy, and nothing in this chunk of the universe that wont take a few hundred million years to become capable of space travel and we lack any means to travel outside of our solar system, so whats the point?

I picked SETI because even if there is intelligent life out there, and if they receive a signal, and if they respond, and if we can receive it, it doesn't matter since communication is hopelessly impractical with the time delay, and a visit from them is impossible within a time frame less than centuries.  I doubt any civilisation will ever find a way to communicate, much less travel at superluminal velocities so SETI should be abandoned.

11

The Polling Pit / Re: Unimportant Scientific Pursuits

« on: January 23, 2008, 12:58:34 PM »

I voted SETI, that shit is full of fail and AIDS.

That's one way you can deal with it-- every time a religious truth claim butts up against science, claim that it was merely allegorical.   But to me that sure looks like a cowardly way to dodge admitting that you don't really know whether religious texts or doctrines are truth to begin with.  Science shouldn't be some kind of steam roller that systematically flattens religious truth claims into allegories.  It shouldn't have to.  If these claims weren't a matter of faith in the first place, people wouldn't have to hold onto them so tightly that they must be preserved at any cost.   Religion shouldn't have just sat on the belief that there was a worldwide flood, and Noah survived it with two of every animal on his ark, until science proved it impossible.  Intellectual honesty would require saying "I have no reason to believe this just because it's printed in a book."

Of course, if everyone applied that kind of thinking, the Bible wouldn't be worth much anymore. 

I'm always baffled by individuals who attempt to "prove" biblical stories such as the flood empirically.  The Grand Canyon is often used (e.g. Penn & Teller Bullshit), and of course their science is always hilariously wrong.  Or the guy whose proof that Moses etc crossed the Red Sea is that, since the Egyptians covered evidence of their defeats, and there was nothing left behind after they got owned, the story is somehow true.

But even if their explanations held up to scientific standards, to attempt to use science to prove (or disprove) the Bible's claims is inherently futile and pointless, since a deity is by definition supernatural, and faith is by definition a belief not based on evidence.  It makes me wonder whether these folks have faith at all, since they cling so hard to their retarded hypotheses, as if their faith would come crashing down were it not for their rationalisation.

12

General / Re: Why Did Ron Paul Lose New Hampshire

« on: January 09, 2008, 08:10:43 PM »

I think this demonstrates that the FSP is the best idea for achieving liberty. 

I was with you up until that. 

The FSP is a dismal failure.  And will be, because no matter how many people you get there, they will still be a very tiny minority, and everything they do and try will be stomped down by the statists. 

I'm still optimistic in the long term. Ron has done more for liberty than anyone who is currently alive. 

You're absolutely right.   And that's truly sad and disgusting.  He's done more for liberty than anyone else in our lifetimes, and he gets 8%. 

I've been reading a few of your posts, I can see how angry you are at all of this.  I am trying to be optimistic, but I am also angry as hell.  Not at Ron or his campaign and supporters, but at the knuckle-dragging imbeciles who represent 95% of the population.  My feeling is that these people don't deserve Ron Paul, they do not deserve liberty.  They deserve all the government they're going to get.  A part of me really just wants to say "fuck you" to all of these people.  I wish we liberty lovers could just leave the planet and settle the moon or something, and leave the rest of the population to stew in the shit pile they have created.

13

General / Re: Why Did Ron Paul Lose New Hampshire

« on: January 09, 2008, 03:02:14 PM »

I can't help but blame the voters.  I would like to give everyone the benefit of the doubt, assume that they're rational individuals open to logical and empirical arguments, but what I suspect is that we will not have liberty until all liberty lovers are separated from the statists, who only respond to emotional appeals.  Christ, I read an article which accounted Hillary's surge to her (almost) crying on TV.  Voters were literally saying that her BAWWWW swayed them from voting for Obama.  I think this demonstrates that the FSP is the best idea for achieving liberty.

I've always suspected most people were fucking idiots, but always withheld judgement.  This confirms it. 

I'm still optimistic in the long term.  Ron has done more for liberty than anyone who is currently alive.  I think that this is the last election where the MSM will hold the most significant control.  Once the internet truly takes over as a news source, statists beware.

14

The Polling Pit / Re: Breakfast?

« on: November 19, 2007, 10:21:52 PM »

100g oats + 400g milk + 3mins microwave = win.

15

The Polling Pit / Re: Mensa

« on: August 25, 2007, 05:52:14 PM »

I have no respect for groups that basically exist just to say how smart they are instead of doing something actually useful with all that supposed brainpower. I could probably get in if I tried but just don't care.

+1.  When I think of Mensa I picture a bunch of uncoordinated, smug, badly dressed twats patting each other on the back and discussing how great it is to belong to the cognitive elite.

I realise this is childish, totally unjustified and an entirely inaccurate interpretation of the organisation, so apologies in advance to any offended mensans.