User Controls
Posts by Lanny
-
2015-09-17 at 7:50 PM UTC in I single handedly keep this website afloatyou wanna pay the server bill then? I could buy some cheap as shit bourbon with that money.
-
2015-09-17 at 7:47 PM UTC in I'm half way into the 6th hour of a conference call and drunk as shitI called in at fucking 7am in the morning because these niggers are east coast bitches and I normally wake up at 10. Like any sane person I woke up with a gin and tonic and have been pretty much continuously alternating between rolling my eyes and drinking since then. My boss just asked me a question and I had to make a concerted effort not to slur. I don't know if I like this or not. On the plus side I get paid to be drunk, on the down side I need to listen to people blather on and on for hours. Half tempted to masturbate on-call for kicks but I'm not quite far enough into "fuck it" mode to do it.
-
2015-09-17 at 4:26 AM UTC in this sucksite sucks a suckhole of sucks
-
2015-09-17 at 3:31 AM UTC in being an outsider
i might as well do well at because then i can get that $$$/pussy
im never going to be petty enough to partake in the things humanity does seriously.
Clearly what you and humanity take seriously are closer to each other than you think. -
2015-09-17 at 3:26 AM UTC in Do rainbows exist objectively?
Well apparently time is affected by black holes:
Gravitational time dilation is a form of time dilation, an actual difference of elapsed time between two events as measured byobservers situated at varying distances from a gravitating mass. The stronger thegravitational potential (the closer the clock is to the source of gravitation), the slower time passes.
This has been demonstrated by noting thatatomic clocks at differing altitudes (and thus different gravitational potential) will eventually show different times.
Are you saying time and light must have mass to be affected by black holes? Maybe not.
nice pasta m8 -
2015-09-17 at 3:22 AM UTC in why do some people not eat meat?Malice, from your own quote:
The analysis of the respective ages at adoption of a vegetarian diet and onset of a mental disorder showed that the adoption of the vegetarian diet tends to follow the onset of mental disorders.
How could vegetarianism possibly be causative of mental disorder if the former is preceded by the latter? If you're not arguing it is then how is it a criticism of vegetarianism? And you accusing people of poor mental health is pretty rich.
P.S. I like how this thread devolved in people complaining about being personally offended by some of the vegetarians they know and malice's laughable to justify anecdotal evidence by claiming he's immune to bias. -
2015-09-17 at 3:11 AM UTC in Do rainbows exist objectively?
From wikipedia:
A rainbow is not located at a specific distance from the observer, but comes from an optical illusion caused by any water droplets viewed from a certain angle relative to a light source. Thus, a rainbow is not an object and cannot be physically approached. Indeed, it is impossible for an observer to see a rainbow from water droplets at any angle other than the customary one of 42 degrees from the direction opposite the light source. Even if an observer sees another observer who seems "under" or "at the end of" a rainbow, the second observer will see a different rainbow—farther off—at the same angle as seen by the first observer.
So what quality of a rainbow makes it an illusion? Yes, observers in different locations may perceive rainbows that appear to "end" at different locations but why is consistency of apparent physical location the criterion for objective existence? If I wear sunglasses I'll perceive things being darker that people who don't. Are the sunglasses an illusion? Is the lower level of light I perceive an illusion (implying I don't, in reality, experience less light)? -
2015-09-16 at 7:25 AM UTC in why do some people not eat meat?
I've heard that its because they don't want to eat something that was once living. Yet get multiple abortions…
Obviously not every ethical vegetarian gets multiple abortions, it seems like most never have any abortions at all. You can still make an argument that the two can be reconciled though. For example, Singer argues that eating fish is not inherently wrong (it may be OK if the fish is slaughtered humanely) because most fish have no notion of themselves in the future, they don't seem to loose anything when they stop existing since they have no longterm plans/interests that can be stymied. You might say the same thing about fetuses. I'm not sure I really buy this argument in either form but I don't think it's _obviously_ the case that the two positions (pro-abortion, anti-meat) are irreconcilable. And wether you accept such arguments or not has exactly nothing to do with the tenability of ethical vegetarianism, it simply means some ethical vegetarians may or may not be behaving unethically in an unrelated way.they say animals are people too. aren't plants people too?
I don't think many people will argue that every animal farmed for meat is a full moral person, I certainly wouldn't, but that doesn't mean we don't have obligation to them or that they don't have rights. Infants do not have full moral personage in the sense that we don't assign them the total range of ethical duties (if an infant starts a fire we don't charge them with arson or neglect or what have you) but we do obviously have an obligation to not kill infants for amusement or meat.
As for plants having the same moral status as mammals like cows, it depends on what you think grants moral considerability. For me it's mammals' ability suffer or feel pleasure. It may not be as developed of a hedonic apparatus as we find in humans but it's obvious that it's of a kind. We don't seem to have any evidence of an analogous capacity in plants, they simply don't seem to have mental states and thus don't suffer or feel pleasure. Thus we don't have a duty to minimize their suffering and can create and destroy them at our leisure, just as we create and destroy non-living objects like rocks or electronics or whatever as it suits human interests. -
2015-09-16 at 7:04 AM UTC in Do rainbows exist objectively?
Wow you are dumb.
A rainbow is a colourful arch which appears in the sky under specific circumstances and is an optical illusion - there really is no arch in the sky.
The visible spectrum is just the portion of the electromagnetic spectrum visible to the human eye. It is not the optical illusion of a giant arch in the sky.
These things have different definitions because they are different things. You dummy.
From wikipedia (yes, wikipedia is fine to use in this case, we're looking to get a feel for common usage):[FONT=sans-serif][SIZE=14px]An [/SIZE][/FONT]illusion[FONT=sans-serif][SIZE=14px] is a distortion of the [/SIZE][/FONT]senses[FONT=sans-serif][SIZE=14px], revealing how the [/SIZE][/FONT]brain[FONT=sans-serif][SIZE=14px] normally organizes and interprets sensory stimulation.[/SIZE][/FONT]
So in what way is a rainbow a distortion of the senses? The light we perceive as rainbows really is hitting our eyes and is interpreted just as any light is. There's no slight of hand at the integration phase nor unusual signal produced by the optic nerve, we perceive what is there perfectly fine. A person might think that a rainbow has a constant physical location independent of the viewer or that it is somehow composed of a solid substance but that's simply a failure to understand rainbows, not an illusion. To someone who doesn't happen to know the standard planetary model it might seem like the sun orbits the earth or travels underground or something but this doesn't mean the sun is merely an optical illusion, it just means one particular person has created an incorrect mental model of what they've experienced. -
2015-09-15 at 7:31 AM UTC in I want to marry a Burmese flower girl
BEEE MY FLOWER GIRLLLLLLLL // BECAUSE WE CANT GET ANY LESS PERFECTTTTTTTT~ -
2015-09-13 at 6:08 PM UTC in Should I buy a legit version of Dark Souls while it's on sale?I just bought morrowind for the third time on steam a couple of days ago. Previous two times were on physical media so I was like "OK, this will be the last time". Don't really mind though, I've gotten so many hours of entertainment out of it I'm happy to throw a little more money at it.
-
2015-09-13 at 5:01 PM UTC in The Universe and You
Consider how much air is not inside your lungs right now. That doesn't mean there isn't air inside of you. Nothing said in the OP is incorrect. The good thing about science is that it's true whether you agree with it or not. So, do you have a legitimate reason to be calling this bullshit, or do you just not like the idea of being connected to everything else?
He didn't say anything in OP was incorrect, he said it was tedious and unoriginal, which it is. What does it matter if we're stardust or whatever? Why is the interesting and why should we care? -
2015-09-13 at 6:33 AM UTC in What will be more valuable after the collapse?I for one am investing heavily in Trump effigies, expecting them to skyrocket in price shortly after his term begins, should it ever begin.
-
2015-09-13 at 4:59 AM UTC in Native Americans weren't so great
This is what actually existing leftism leads to, Lanny:
http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2014/10/housing_and_pov.html
You made the poor poor and then you proclaim yourselves to be the only ones preventing them from starving. You people sicken me.
An out-of-context chart about one, not particularly important, issue generated from data out of a political research group which was a driving force in the Bush jr. era. Yes, you're sure shown me, all my ideas about leftism were wrong, an entire political philosophy turned over with one simple chart. Yeahhhhh -
2015-09-13 at 4:08 AM UTC in Freedom or SecurityI have no idea what's going on here.
-
2015-09-13 at 1:22 AM UTC in It's the day to add the THANKS feature, Lan LanStill a work in progress but you can see a person of color at least.
-
2015-09-12 at 8:25 PM UTC in Freedom or SecuritySecurity, assuming what we're talking about is like live verses death. Being dead and free means nothing, while a person can be perfectly happy with limited freedoms (the freest society you can imagine has limited freedoms). Platitudes from founding fathers don't change that fact.
But "security vs. freedom" is usually a euphemism for specific US policy discussions like the practices of the TSA or NSA neither of which I can say I support, not because they deny us freedoms (particularly the TSA, while they're a pain in the ass it's hard to argue being subjected to security screening when you enter an airport of your own volition is a profound curtailment of freedoms) but because much of the associated policy is simply ineffective or comes at too great a cost relative to the evils they're supposed to be protecting us from. In short, terrorists targeting the US general population are a sufficiently small threat that the countermeasures we see employed today cost more than we stand to lose, but it's easy to imagine a world where that's not the case, where failing to restrict some freedoms would lead to far worse outcomes, even if you consider freedoms intrinsically valuable, than doing so. -
2015-09-12 at 7:58 PM UTC in Killing Floor / Killing Floor 2
My friend just talked about this game to me. It looks interesting, I'm a huge fan of horror survival games, so I'll be buying it soon so him and I can play together. I could add you to the team if you'd like!
For sure, I'm always looking for people to play with. Do I have you on steam? I feel like I do but no one uses their normal handles for some reason. My screen name thingy is "Made In Tarth" in case you don't already have it.
Are you going to be playing 1 or 2? -
2015-09-12 at 6:36 AM UTC in Mark311 is dead"well that's all I've got to say about that"
lol -
2015-09-12 at 5:49 AM UTC in Native Americans weren't so great
for USians, leftism is the more popular of the two phony, constrained, self-contradicting options within our false paradigm.
God, I hope for your sake you're trolling and not dumb enough to actually post that.
