1

Arts & Entertainment / Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General

« on: April 15, 2024, 06:57:36 PM »

This just in: most of Paw Patrol's audience is young children!

2

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: April 12, 2024, 05:36:36 AM »

It's clearly the beginning of the end for Donald Trump.

Probably not.

I don't know why Tom keeps saying this. It's like he thinks it's the general opinion of liberals, like we've been saying this over and over for as long as he has, perpetually locked in the fantasy that Trump's comeuppance is right around the corner, and obviously that's not the case with most of us. I doubt there are many American liberals that by this point don't have the attitude that nothing is going to hurt Trump because he's invincible, or at least that they'll believe it when they see it.

3

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Flat Earth Theory Inquiry - flat earth model of how the Apr. 8 eclipse worked

« on: April 12, 2024, 02:56:15 AM »

That's an excellent question. I have no idea how to answer that myself but I've no doubt our finest thinkers will be getting right on this.

4

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: April 10, 2024, 11:48:36 PM »

"The former president owns a majority stake in the company and his stake was valued at about $2.9 billion on Monday, down from a peak of over $6 billion after its debut on its trading debut."

It sounds like Trump's stake is still worth billions. This still appears to be his most profitable venture, and appears to be a doing lot better than most business ventures.

As long as you're Trump, of course. All those people who made him rich by investing in his worthless shit, on the other hand...

5

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: I am wondering why I do not see...

« on: April 08, 2024, 11:09:58 PM »

Saw it today. Transcendent experience, I'm so glad I traveled to Texas to see it. I don't think it really proves anything about the shape of the Earth, but it's definitely a potent reminder of how awe-inspiring (and, dare I say, magical) the universe can be.

6

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden

« on: April 03, 2024, 12:32:48 AM »

He had a choice to declare Transgender Day of Visibility Transgender Day of Visibility. The fact that it occurred on Easter is a coincidence.

I have to say you usually seem to try to avoid it, Tom, but sometimes you really do read like a parody. It can be hilarious sometimes. At any rate it's literally impossible to take you seriously in this case, I hope you understand.

7

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: March 19, 2024, 12:18:30 AM »

I suspect Trump could get this money if he really wanted to, through multiple lenders, creative financing, etc. Even in the complaints from his lawyers they inadvertently describe some ways he could do it. But that is the wrong play here. If New York actually seizes his assets it will be shocking international news which would have the effect of turning Trump into a martyr.

Only to the sycophantic cult members though, and he's already been a martyr to them for years, so no big deal.

8

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden

« on: March 02, 2024, 11:30:20 AM »

And therefore not a leader but a spokesman or figurehead.

Wow. Ok, look up the definition of the word "president" as it pertains to our government and get back to me. This isn't the fucking Royal Family we're talking about here.

9

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden

« on: March 01, 2024, 10:23:19 PM »

Biden just isn’t well enough to be president. He’s not well enough physically or mentally.

Hmm. I dunno about this. To me, one of them (Trump, to avoid ambiguity) has bad intentions, while the other one is "just" in bad health*. We definitely agree that neither is ideal. But, to me, it seems like our options are a comparably healthy person who's actively malicious, and one person who might end up handing power over to another milquetoast Democrat if things get bad enough.

* - if we even accept that narrative to begin with. I honestly don't know if he's any worse than Trump on that front. Recall the hysteria around Trump's health when he was president - and the counter-argument in which his health was declared to be Truly Presidential™ by his doctor.

I'm not sure Trump is actually malicious. He's not trying to take America down from the inside.

Interesting take, that the man who literally led a violent effort to subvert our Democratic process isn't "actually malicious". I'm sure a lot of people who aren't crazy about Trump but can't stomach the thought of 4 more years of Biden are rationalizing things the same way.

It's demonstrably wrong, of course...

He strongly encouraged others to do a thing.  Not really leading, per se.

That being said, maybe he's so delusional with rich man privledge that he honestly thinks he won?

Dave, he was asking for it for months. His followers wouldn't have been there if he hadn't been asking for it. He was the leader of our country, and for a lot of people he held, and still holds, the power of a cult leader, and he encouraged his followers to lead an insurrection to subvert our Democratic process and install him as a dictator.

I can't imagine how it can be argued that he didn't literally lead it.

10

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden

« on: March 01, 2024, 07:46:11 PM »

Biden just isn’t well enough to be president. He’s not well enough physically or mentally.

Hmm. I dunno about this. To me, one of them (Trump, to avoid ambiguity) has bad intentions, while the other one is "just" in bad health*. We definitely agree that neither is ideal. But, to me, it seems like our options are a comparably healthy person who's actively malicious, and one person who might end up handing power over to another milquetoast Democrat if things get bad enough.

* - if we even accept that narrative to begin with. I honestly don't know if he's any worse than Trump on that front. Recall the hysteria around Trump's health when he was president - and the counter-argument in which his health was declared to be Truly Presidential™ by his doctor.

I'm not sure Trump is actually malicious. He's not trying to take America down from the inside.

Interesting take, that the man who literally led a violent effort to subvert our Democratic process isn't "actually malicious". I'm sure a lot of people who aren't crazy about Trump but can't stomach the thought of 4 more years of Biden are rationalizing things the same way.

It's demonstrably wrong, of course...

11

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: February 20, 2024, 07:35:06 PM »

I didn't mean he was actually defrauding people.
I mean, if you're going to go around spending $300 on sneakers then you're clearly an idiot, but I guess that's your business.
I just find it hilarious how easy Trump finds it to extract money from his cult.

$300 isn't an unusual amount to spend on fashionable sneakers. I'd never spend it but I know people who would.

12

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden

« on: February 18, 2024, 05:13:28 PM »

compos mentis¹

Ah. Thanks. I rarely see it written down so I took a punt!

Many of the things he's said, especially during his presidency when his publicity was at its highest, strongly suggested that his grasp on reality was tenuous at best. Are you sure that you're comparing the two fairly, rather than falling for the trap of hearing Biden say silly things more recently?

I largely agree that Trump has little grasp of reality but I think it’s in a different way to Biden. Trump doesn’t seem to know or care what is true, and I agree that’s not an ideal trait in a president. And I basically hate everything he says and stands for. But I think he’s basically mentally all there. He talks bollocks but does so because he’s an idiot and a narcissist. He’s not actually demented.

I strongly disagree. His grasp of reality was already tenuous while he was president, and he's only gotten more unhinged as time has gone on. Those little gaffes of Biden's that have everyone so worried about his mental state? Those moments where he seems to lose track of what's going on? Such moments exist for Trump as well, in spades.

I'm not sure either one of them is "all there". But all things being equal (which as far as their mental acuity goes they probably are, or very close to it anyway) I'll take benevolent over evil any fucking day and I think it's insane to think otherwise.

13

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden

« on: February 15, 2024, 08:57:54 PM »

Putin endorses Joe Biden for POTUS. Very interesting.

Yes I'm sure that the master propagandist and manipulator isn't propagandizing and being manipulative with that endorsement. Seems legit. 

14

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden

« on: February 09, 2024, 05:05:25 AM »

Seriously. At this point I think the Democrats are just as wrongheaded to stick with Biden as the Republicans are to stick with Trump. It's fucking embarrassing.

15

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: February 03, 2024, 12:09:42 AM »

Trump disagreed with his lawyers offering that. If you can't say that you would take the people prosecuting you out to lunch then this sounds like a rules for thee but not for me situation.

Tom's focusing on all the wrong things again lol. You do you Tom. Never change.

16

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: February 02, 2024, 09:38:25 PM »

https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/01/politics/roberta-kaplan-donald-trump-deposition-maralago/index.html

This fucking child could actually be elected president again, I can't even

If someone comes to your house and wants to deposition you on a crime that you have allegedly committed, who should be taking who out to lunch, if anyone?

Why does this matter? Trump's attorneys made the offer lol, it's not like Carrol's attorney begged or even asked. And the C.U.N.T. joke, very classy, not something you would expect from a 12-year old at all. 

17

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: February 02, 2024, 05:35:41 PM »

https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/01/politics/roberta-kaplan-donald-trump-deposition-maralago/index.html

This fucking child could actually be elected president again, I can't even

18

Flat Earth Theory / Re: The Conspiracy Theory of Space Travel being a Hoax

« on: January 29, 2024, 10:23:01 PM »

Where does this leave Flat Earth Theory? Just fine, as it turns out, as long as one accepts Electromagnetic Acceleration as a necessary component of FET. The same effect that might cause the illusion of a horizon might also cause large flat objects to appear round from a great distance.

In which case what's the differentiator between FE and RE? What observation can you make to distinguish between the two models if FE + EA = RE, in terms of what we observe? Presumably there's some difference which makes you lean towards one model over the other.

Indeed, I think the immediate evidence with my own eyes is more likely to be reliable than pictures from many thousands or more of miles away. I guess it's more of a philosophical position than anything else. If I perceive the Earth to be flat while I'm right up against it, why should I blindly assume that the alternative evidence is better?

19

Flat Earth Theory / Re: The Conspiracy Theory of Space Travel being a Hoax

« on: January 27, 2024, 02:42:48 AM »

I'm not terribly confident in the existence of the Conspiracy. The more individual countries seem to be involved; the more pictures they produce that are impossible to falsify as far we can tell; the more people you have to imagine have to be in it to some degree for it to even be possible; not to mention all the sources from independent sources that show the same sorts of images; it starts to stretch credibility to a small degree.

Where does this leave Flat Earth Theory? Just fine, as it turns out, as long as one accepts Electromagnetic Acceleration as a necessary component of FET. The same effect that might cause the illusion of a horizon might also cause large flat objects to appear round from a great distance.

20

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Get a haircut, you hippie!

« on: January 25, 2024, 08:27:29 PM »

Where have I said anything negative about mask mandates?

Ok, I admit it. Apparently I was wr... I was wro...

I may possibly have been mistaken. Apologies for making an assumption based on your political leanings

Roundy, Tom wasn't against mask mandates as far as I know.

I was. Because they do harm people.

How so?